
* 3 M ^ n\^^ 



'. ■">. 



v^S^ 












\°°<. 



^> sS 















^^^ ^^. 




x'^' 



^- ^ - -p. ^ .^ ^> « A- 



oo^ 






i 



% 



<■■ 



^,^' =r^^pC/%^^ %/ 






<0^; 








.if.i:.r> ^,-owr> 



JP: a jfs ir. T IK .^11 F 1., 



oJ %0 CUixS^^^J^ k^ 



ClM-l. 



7^, 



fLx^ fv/LyfO) 



u) (i(m^ir^»~hj^ /ee/i c^L ^^ /t/U^C^ 



w^ 



LETTERS ON JUNIUS, 



ADDRESSED 



TO JOHN PICKERING, ESQ. 



SHOWING THAT THE 



AUTHOR OF THAT CELEBRATED WORK 



EARL TEMPLE. 



BY ISAAC NEWHALL. 



AT A PROrER TIME VOU SHALL KNOW ME. JUNIUS. 



BOSTON. 

HILLIARD, GRAY, LITTLE, AND WILKINS, 

1831. 






Entered atcorcling to Act of Congress, in the year 1831, by Isaac Newhall, in the 
Clerk's Office of the District Court of Massachusetts. 



HIHAM T UPPER, PBIKTER 



ADVERTISEMENT 



The present work was first announced by the following 
Notice, published in the Boston Evening Transcripts of 
September 25,1830 — 

' Junius. — A southern paper has lately republished an article 
which originally appeared in the Boston Palladium of the 6th of 
August last, and contained the following remark — '' The New 
York papers now say, that the late Earl Temple, brother of the 
Right Hon. George Grenville, the jmtative father of our noto- 
rious Stamp Act, was the writer of Junius ; but it is difficult to 
believe it.' The author of the article then goes on to enforce his 
doubts by a concise view of the character and talents of Earl 
Temple ; conceding, that he was " respectable " as a writer but 
adding — " we can hardly suppose him to have been the author ' 
of the best compositions in our language. To write better than 
Bolingbroke, Swift, or Johnson, is an elevation which none of 
the Grenvilles, clever as they were, ever rose to." 

' The writer of this Boston article, whose style indicates him 
to be of the old classical English school, has evidently studied 
the characters of the statesmen who influenced or directed the 
measures of the British government at the period in question. 
But, notwithstanding the strong opinion here expressed by him, 
I can venture to assure him, that he will hereafter find quite as 
strong reasons for changing it. 

' The suspicion that Lord Temple was the author of Junius, 
has, it is true, been but recently thrown out in England: and 
tliat suspicion has been founded upon statements lately made 
there, of the existence of certain papers alleged to have been 
found at Stowe (the family residence of Lord Temple), which, 



IV ADVERTISEMENT. 

it is said, establish the fact, that Junius's Letters were written 
by some one of the Grenvilles. Mr E. H. Barker, the latest 
English writer upon the Junius controversy, in his work respect- 
ing the claims of Sir Philip Francis (which I think are now 
completely demolished), appears to have but little faith in the 
supposed discoveries made at Stowe. However that fact may 
be, I can inform the correspondent of the Palladium, that many 
years ago, an American gentleman, residing in a neighboring 
town, had, after much investigation and reflection, come to the 
conclusion, that Lord Temple was, beyond any doiiht, the author of 
Junius. This result was obtained, not by the aid of any extrin- 
sic evidence of the kind supposed to exist in England (which 
was of course not accessible in this country), but merely by a 
continued and careful study of Junius, and of contemporary 
publications relating to the political history of that day. The 
grounds of this opinion were noted down, from time to time, by 
the individual alluded to; and by patient and regular deductions 
from the internal and historical evidence in the case, the above 
result will now be established in such a manner, as, in my hum- 
ble judgment, leaves no more room for doubt. I am enabled to 
add, that the materials collected by the discoverer himself, in 
support of this opinion, will shortly be published. 

'A Reader of Junius.' 

The individuaj alluded to in this Notice was Mr New- 
hall, of Salem, in Massachusetts ; and the present Letters 
contain the result of his investigations. In consequence 
of his absence from the place of publication, the work was 
put into the hands of a friend, who has performed whatever 
editorial duty has been required in the case. 

Boston, June 7, 1831 . 



CONTENTS 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY ix 

LETTER I. 

Account of the Author's original investigation of the author- 
ship of Junius's Letters — The Pamphlet of 1766, enti- 
tled An Enquirij into the Conduct of a Late Right Hon- 
orable Commoner, (i. e. Mr Pitt afterwards Lord Chatham), 

written by Lord Temple ] 

LETTER IL 

The Authorship of that Pamphlet further considered — 

Extracts from the Pamphlet 9 

LETTER III. 

The same subject continued — Comparison of the Pamphlet 
with Junius's Letters — The family connexion of Lord 
Temple, Mr George Grenville, and Mr Pitt — Lord Tem- 
ple's Reconciliation with Mr Grenville — His co-operation 
in the North Briton, and his acquaintance with Mr Wilkes 19 
LETTER IV. 

One of the Miscellaneous Letters of Junius, signed Pop- 
licola, corresponding with Lord Temple's Pamphlet . 33 
LETTER V. 

References to other Miscellaneous Letters of Junius, re- 
specting Lord Chatham — The Reconciliation between 
Lord Chatham and Lord Temple, corresponding to the 
change in Junius's tone and feelings — The eminent 
talents of Lord Temple — Lord Chatham's letter contain- 
ing the reasons of his resignation 39 

LETTER VI. 

The warm attachment of Junius for Mr George Grenville — 
Junius's declaration, that he was not personally known to 
Mr Grenville, explained 45 



VI CONTENTS. 

LETTER VII. 

Account of Mr George Grenville — Offends his brothers, 

but afterwards, reconciled 56 

LETTER VIII. 

Junius's Agreement in politics, with Mr Grenville — The 
Public Life of Mr Pitt— Mr Pitt and the Grenvilles omit- 
ted in the Ministerial Arrangements — Mr Pitt dismissed 
and again recalled — The Quarrel in Parliament between 
Lord Temple and Lord Bute — Further remarks on the 
Separation of Mr Grenville from his family — Lord Bute 
obliged to retire — The case of Wilkes's North Briton — 
Mr Pitt's Declaration respecting it — A new Negotiation 
attempted, by the Earl of Bute, to bring Mr Pitt into office 

— The king himself sends for Mr Pitt and Lord Temple 59 

LETTER IX. 

The disagreement between Mr Pitt and Lord Temple, con- 
tinued — Lord Bute's policy, as to the great families — 
He solicits an interview with Lord Temple and Mr Gren- 
ville ; and the result 73 

LETTER X. 

A new arrangement is proposed to Mr Pitt — Sir William 
Pynsent bequeathes him an Estate — Mr Pitt is involved 
in litigation respecting it — Lord Mansfield's suspected 
influence in this case, supposed to be a motive for Junius's 
attacks — Lord Bute's Private Influence ; and an extraor- 
dinary instance of vigilance in observing his movements 

— Further remarks on the Quarrel between Lord Temple 
and Mr Pitt 77 

LETTER XI. 
Effects of the Disagreement between Lord Temple and Lord 
Chatham — Their reconciliation, and Junius's change of 

tone 84 

LETTER XII. 
Lord Chatham's strong regard for Lord Temple — The Brit- 
ish successes, under Lord Chatham, essentially owing to 
the ability of Lord Temple — List of British victories 05 
LETTER XIII. 
Account of the Earl of Bute, and the motives of Junius for 
attacking him — Lord Bute ai;^d his friends determine to 
humble the Grenvilles — His offensive language towards 
Lord Temple — A Portrait of him 103 



CONTENTS. Vll 

LETTER XIV. 

Junius's feelings towards the Prince, George III, as the 
pupil of Lord Bute — Memorial, from Dodington's Diary, 
on the Education of the Prince ; probably by Lord Tem- 
ple — Lord Bute's plan, to keep possession of the King, 
and to destroy the influence of the Grenvilles — Extracts 
from Dodington's Diary — The hostility of George II to 
Lord Temple, in the case of Admiral Byng .... 117 
LETTER XV. 
The hostility of Junius to Lord Mansfield and Sir William 

Blackstone 129 

LETTER XVI. 

Mr Wilkes's intimacy with Lord Temple — His arrest, under 

a General Warrant — Lord Temple's interposition in his 

behalf — Mr Wilkes, dismissed fi-om his office of Colonel, 

and Lord Temple's subsequent dismissal — Lord Temple's 

letter to him on that occasion 133 

LETTER XVII. 

The same subject continued 142 

LETTER XVIII. 
The Duke of Grafton, formerly a friend, but afterwards a 
bitter enemy, of Mr Wilkes — The attack of Junius on 

the Duke — The case of McQuirk 148 

LETTER XIX. 
The Duke of Bedford — Reasons for Junius's attack on him 155 

LETTER XX. 

TheMarquisofGranby— Sir William Draper .... 161 

LETTER XXI. 

Account of Earl Temple and his family 167 

LETTER XXII. 
Lord Temple's residence, at Stowe ; and, while in London, 
in Pall-Mall — Junius, not necessarily a military man . 175 
LETTER XXIII. 
Junius and Lord Temple held the same political opinions 180 

LETTER XXIV. 
The opinion of the Welsh judge, George Hardinge, of Junius 
— Junius's panegyric on Lord Chatham — The motives 
of Junius, and reasons for discontinuing his Letters — 
Burke's politics, and his opinion of Mr George Grenville 185- 



Vlll CONTENTS. 

LETTER XXV. 

Junius was a member of Parliament — Extract from Mr 
Cotes's journal — Junius does not mention Lord Temple 
in his Letters — An early friend of Mr Almon . . . 192 

LETTER XXVI. 

Parallel passages from the Writings of Junius and Lord 
Temple — Prophetic opinions of Junius respecting the 

American contest 198 

LETTER XVII. 
Additional Remarks on Junius and Mr George Grenville — 
Junius signs one of his Miscellaneous Letters, A Member 

of one House of Parliament 201 

LETTER XXVIII. 
On the person, figure, and handwriting of Junius — The 

copy of his Letters bound in vellum 203 

LETTER XXXI. 
Lord Temple's age — Almon's Anecdotes of Chatham, proba- 
bly, in part written by Lord Temple — Description of 

Stowe , ... 205 

LETTER XXX. 
Explanatory Remarks, respecting Lord Chesterfield's sup- 
posed opinion of Lord Temple and the Pamphlet . . 212 
LETTER XXXI. 
Account of the Stowe Papers 227 

LETTER XXXIl. 
Dt Waterhouse's work on Junius 227 



APPENDIX. 

No. I. — The Pamphlet of 17GC, entitled ' An Enquiry into 
the Conduct of a Late Right Honourable Com- 
moner ' (Mr Pitt), written by Lord Temple . 237 
II. — Lord Chesterfield's Letter, respecting the above 

Pamphlet 261 

HI.— Character of Mr George Grenville 263 

IV.— The North Briton, No. 45 . 267 

V. — Dr Johnson's Critique on Junius 272 

VI.— The arrangement of the Ministry, 1767 to 1770 . 276 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 



The materials of the following Letters were, in part 
collected many years ago without any view to publica- 
tion ; and they would probably have remained unpub- 
lished, had not the authorship of Junius's Letters been 
again brought before the literary world by the late re- 
ported discovery of certain papers in the archives of 
the Grenville family at Stowe, in England, which, it is 
said in the journals of the day, ' establish beyond the 
possibility of doubt, the real author.' This * real au- 
thor,' according to the latest accounts from England, 
is by some conjectured to be Earl Temple, the elder 
brother of the celebrated George Grenville, and brother- 
in-law of Lord Chatham. 

The object of the present Letters is to prove, that 
Lord Temple was in fact the author ; and that this dis- 
covery was made in the United States, by the writer, 
many years ago — long before any hints or indications 
were given of there being evidence like that which 
b 



X INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

is said to have been found at Stowe, — much less that 
the evidence was such, as, it was conjectured, would 
fix that authorship on Lord Temple. 

After the numerous unsuccessful attempts to solve 
this curious problem in English literature, it may ap- 
pear presumptuous, particularly in an American — 
under all the disadvantages of his distance from the 
scene of Junius's warfare, and the want of a personal 
acquaintance with the minute occurrences of that pe- 
riod — to fancy, that he has discovered the author. 
Yet it may be said with truth, that such a distant posi- 
tion for observation is not without its advantages ; for 
if, on the one hand, an observer thus circumstanced 
v/ould be obliged to throw away more labor in his pur- 
suit, than one who was nearer to the scene, yet, on 
the other hand, the former would be less likely to have 
his attention distracted and led astray from the main 
object by circumstances in reality of inferior importance, 
which would make an undue impression upon one who 
should happen to be, if we may so speak, present at the 
place of action ; as, according to the common observa- 
tion, the looker-on has a more commanding view of the 
game than those who are engaged in it. So far, however, 
as respects the discussion of this question by Americans, 
it will suffice to remark, that we have as great an interest 
in every question of English literature as our brethren 
of the mother country. Their literature still is — and 
long may it continue to be — ours. 

But some persons may, perhaps, be ready to ask ac- 
cording to the prevailing fashion of the age — of what 
vtiliiy will it be to discuss this question ? Instead of 
giving an answer to this inquiry in our own language, 
we beg leave to reply in the just and forcible remarks 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XI 

of an accomplished writer in a leading British journal 
of the present day : * 

' A succession of problems, or puzzles, in the literary 
and political history of modern times, has occasion- 
ally occupied some ingenious writers, and amused many 
idle readers. Those who think nothing 2iseful, which 
does not yield some palpable and direct advantage, 
have indeed scornfully rejected such inquiries as frivo- 
lous and useless. But their disdain has not repressed 
such discussions — and it is fortunate that it has not. 
Amusement is itself an advantage. The vigor, which 
the understanding derives from exercise on every sub- 
ject, is a great advantage. If there should be any 
utility in history, it must be very useful, that it should 
be accurate — which it never will be, unless there be 
a sohcitude to ascertain the truth even of its minutest 
parts. History is read with pleasure, and with moral 
effect, only so far as it engages our feelings in the merit 
or demerit, in the fame or fortune, of historical person- 
ages. If it did not excite such feelings, we should 
study it with the same coolness and tranquillity with 
which we study physical science. But, in contemplat- 
ing the fortunes of our fellow creatures, in history, in 
fiction, or in real life, we are eager, we are intensely 
anxious to discover the guilt or innocence, the claims 
to eminence, or the events of the lives of those whose 
characters have excited in our minds strong feelings, 
whether friendly or adverse. Our interest in the his- 
tory of past times is of the same nature with our sen- 
timents on the matters that daily occur around us. 
The breathless anxiety, with which the obscure and 

* Edinburgh Review for June 1826, vol. 44, page 1 3 in an 
article ascribed to Sir James Mackintosh. 



XU INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

conflicting evidence on a trial at law is watched by the 
by-standers, is but a variety of the same feeling, which 
prompts the reader of history to examine the proofs 
against Mary Queen of Scots, with as deep interest as 
if she were alive, and were now on her trial. And it is 
wisely ordered, that it should be so. For the condition 
of mankind would not, upon the whole, be bettered by 
our feeling less strongly about each others' concerns.' 

This able writer then enumerates various problems 
of the kind in question — as, ' Who wrote the book 
which bears the name of Thomas a-Kempis 1 Who was 
Perkin Warbeck ? Was Queen Mary an accomplice 
in the murder of Lord Darnley ? Who was the Pris- 
oner in the Iron Mask ? Who was the writer of the 
Whole Duty of Man ? Who wrote the Letters of 
Junius ? ' And, after briefly adverting to the state of 
the evidence on these several problems, he makes the 
following remarks on the last of them : 

' The writer of the Letters of Junius is still undis- 
covered [June, 1826]. The only claim entitled to 
discussion, is that set up for Sir Philip Francis^ in 
spite of that gentleman himself, by Mr Taylor, in the 
very ingenious book, too boldly entitled ' Junius Iden- 
tified.' * From that book, especially from the interest 

* After the appearance of Mr Taylor's first publication,, 
the Editor of the English Monthly Magazine made a direct in- 
quiry of Sir Philip Francis, as to his authorship ; to this the fol- 
lowing reply was made ; which, notwithstanding its strong lan- 
guage, Mr Taylor is pleased to consider as so evasive, that he 
wonders ' how any one can have been misled by it for a mo- 
ment : ' 

'Sir, — The great civihty of your letter induces me to an- 
swer it, which, with reference merely to its subject matter, 
I should have declined. Whether you will assist in giving 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Mm 

taken by Junius in the petty intrigues of the War 
Office, and from the coincidence of the artificial hand- 
writing of Junius with the artificial hand-writing of Sir 
Philip, in the possession of Mr Giles, we may probably 
infer, that Sir Philip was in the confidence of Junius 
and perhaps his amanuensis. The supposition, how- 
ever, most prevalent among contemporary politicians 
and men of letters was, that the Letters were written 
by Mr Dyer, an original member of Johnson's Club, 
and an intimate friend of Burke, from whom the writer 
might have received some of his information, perhaps 
casually ; and from whose conversation the few but 
striking Burkisms, so much at variance with the gen- 
eral tenor of the style, might have overflowed into the 
mind of Dyer and almost insensibly dropped from his 
pen. A simple test ascertains the political connexion 
of Junius — the only circumstance which he could 
not disguise, because it could not he concealed ivithout 
defeating his general purpose. He supported the cause 
of authority against America — with Mr Grenville, the 
minister who passed the Stamp Act. He maintained 
the highest popular principles on the Middlesex Elec- 
tion — with the same statesman, who was the leader 
of opposition on that question. No other party in the 
kingdom hut the Grenvilles comhined these tico opinions ; 
and it is very unlikely, that a private writer, unpledged 
and unconnected, should have spontaneously embraced 
political doctrines, which, though ingenuity might re- 
currency to a silly, malignant falsehood, is a question for your 
own discretion. To me it is a matter of perfect indifference. 

I am, Sir, yours, &c. 

P. Francis.' 
' To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.' 
h* 



XlV INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

concile them in reasoning, were, in the disputes of 
that period, the opposite extremes.' 

After these just remarks, this reviewer arrives at the 
following conclusion — ' Whoever revives the inquiry, 
therefore, unless he discovers positive and irresistible 
evidence in support of his claimant, should show him 
to be politically attached to the Grenville party ^ lohich 
Junius certainly was, and must also produce some spe- 
cimens of his writings of tolerable length, such as 
might afford reasonable ground for believing, that he 
could have written these Letters — which must be 
allowed to be finished models, though not of the purest 
and highest sort of composition. The general vigor 
of a man's mental powers affords little more proof that 
he could be a good writer, than that he could be a great 
painter. There may indeed be evidence so positive, as 
will establish the truth of the supposition which ap- 
peared most improbable — as has actually happened in 
the case of the Iron Mask. But such possibilities 
must exist in all moral reasonings.' 

On the present question, however, the reviewer justly 
adds, in a note to his article (p. 6), the following qual- 
ifications of his general conclusion — * It is not to be 
understood, that other persons may not have held opin- 
ions adverse to the cause of the Americans and favor- 
able to that of Wilkes. The value of the criterion 
depends on the improbability, that, on the two most 
important questions which occurred for ten years, a 
writer of great ability should zealously, frequently, and 
for a long period, write in support of the popular side 
on one, and of the unpopular on the other, unless he, 
or those whom he supported, had been pledged to these 
opposite opinions, by measures of so public and decisive 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XV^ 

a nature as to cut off all retreat. It may be oberved 
also, that Junius, who is unfriendly to Lord Chatham 
in the beginning, loads that nobleman with panegyric, 
after he was reconciled to Lord Temple and Mr Gren- 
ville. There did, and perhaps there still does exist, a 
private letter from Junius to Mr Grenville, professing 
political attachment, and at the same time discouraging 
all attempts to pluck off his mask. Wilkes was origi- 
nally Member for Aylesbury, and Lieutenant Colonel of 
the Bucks Militia, under Lord Temple. Hence the 
extravagantly disproportioned interest taken by Junius 
in every petty intrigue of alderman and sheriffs, which 
touched that celebrated adventurer. Though a few 
letters were written after the death of Mr Grenville, 
yet to that event and the dissolution of his jyarty, the 
cessation of Junius is to be attributed. In these cir- 
cumstances, and others not yet publicly known, originat- 
ed the supposition that Mr Lloyd was Junius. But 
some specimen of his writing is wanting to countenance 
that supposition. In the cases of Dyer and Francis, 
the two candidates of most plausible pretension, no 
proof has hitherto appeared of connexion loith the Gren- 
ville party. Some resemblance of style in Francis is 
a very inconsiderable argument ; for almost every con- 
tributor to a newspaper, during the twenty years which 
followed the Letters, was an imitator of Junius.' * 

The justness of these reflections will be evident upon 
a careful attention to the facts exhibited in the follow- 
ing Letters ; and, to use the language of the science of 
demonstration, all the essential conditions of the prob- 
lem will be satisfied. In order, however, that the 
ft. 

* Edinburgh Review, ubi S7ij). 



XVI INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

reader may be possessed of the actual state of this curi- 
ous and interesting question, it may be useful to take a 
brief review of the history of the Junius controversy. 
For, though every reader has a general knowledge of 
it, yet few persons, probably, have a sufficiently precise 
recollection of particulars to enable them to make any 
useful comparison of what has been written, or suppos- 
ed to be discovered, with what is brought into view in 
the present publication. A very summary account of 
the principal claims, which have been made for different 
authors, will accordingly be here given. 

On the first appearance of Junius's Letters, the atten- 
tion of the public, as well as of the parties interested, 
was immediately directed to the discovery of an author, 
who discussed the gravest constitutional questions with 
an ability, which was equalled only by his remorseless 
severity and fearlessness in scanning the measures and 
private characters of the men, who directed the 
affairs of Great Britain at that period — not sparing 
even the sacred and inviolable majesty of the sover- 
eign himself 

The various claims, however, which have been made 
on behalf of the greater part of the supposed authors, 
may be disposed of without any difficulty ; even some 
which have been brought forward under the most plau- 
sible and imposing circumstances. In this class we 
may now place that, which has been lately re- 
newed with so much earnestnestness, for Mr Charles 
Lloyd, who was at that period a clerk of the Treasury, 
and afterwards a deputy-teller of the Exchequer. Much 
importance has been attached to this claim, in conse- 
quence of the very decided opinion in its favor, which 
was long entertained, and was defended to the last with 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XVll 

the most obstinate heroism, by that late eminent Eng- 
lish scholar, Dr Parr — a claim, to which the authority 
of this venerated and remarkable man has given its chief 
consequence, but which will be examined in a subse- 
quent part of our remarks, and, as we think, shown to be 
unsupported. 

For the mere convenience of reference, the claims 
of the supposed authors will be here very briefly con- 
sidered, in the alphabetical order of their respective 
names or titles. 

1. Lord AsHBURTON, more familiarly known as Mr 
Dunning, the celebrated English lawyer, has been 
long suspected as the author of Junius. The most 
formal and express claim in his favor was made in the 
highly valuable, though now somewhat neglected, edi- 
tion of Junius, published in London in 1801, under the 
name of ^ Robert Heron, Esquire,^ and reprinted in 
the United States in 1804, upon which some further 
remarks will be hereafter made. That editor says, in 
very guarded language — ' I believe myself to have 
nearly discovered who was certainly the author of these 
Letters. But I have, without entirely satisfying my- 
self, protracted inquiries, and renewed my doubts, till 
the necessity of publication calls upon me to interrupt 
them with an imperiousness that is no longer to be re- 
sisted. I cannot now lay before the reader all the de- 
tails of facts and circumstances on which my judgment 
is founded. The result I shall briefly state. The au- 
tlior of these Letters was no other than the celebrated 
Dunning, afterwards Lord Ashburton.' 

This editor then proceeds to argue, but by no means 
on satisfactory grounds, that Lord Ashburton alone had 
those motives for attacking Lord Mansfield and the Duke 



XVlll INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

of Grafton, which certainly influenced the mind of Ju- 
nius — that he alone possessed that knowledge of the 
constitutional law — that the nervous, epigrammatic 
cast of his speeches and pleadings had no mean resem- 
blance to the style and manner of Junius — that he had 
those political connexions with different parties and in- 
dividuals, which the letters imply — that he had the 
strongest reasons for concealing the authorship forever, 
on account of the favors received by him from the 
crown, &c. 

In answer to this claim, however, it is justly observed 
in the Preliminary Essay to Woodfall's Junius — now 
well understood to have been written by Dr John 
Mason Good — that ' Dunning was Solicitor General 
at the time these Letters first appeared, and for more 
than a twelve-month afterwards ; and Junius himself 
has openly and solemnly affirmed — '' I am no lawyer 
hy profession; nor do I pretend to be more deeply read 
than every English gentleman should be in the laws of 
his country." Dunning was a man of high and unblem- 
ished honor, as well as of high independent principles ; 
it cannot therefore be supposed, that he would have 
vilified the king, while one of the king's confidential 
servants and counsellors ; nor would he as a barrister 
have written to Woodfall in the course of a confidential 
correspondence — '' I am advised^ that no jury will find a 
bill.'"* 

To these remarks we may add, that Junius constant- 
ly manifests a fixed and by no means an affected con- 
tempt for the legal profession. In one of his letters to 
Mr Wilkes (Sept. 18, 1771), he says, with an earnest 

* See, among other places, Junius's Preface ; Letters 14 and 
C8 ; Private Letters to Wilkes. Sent. 18. 1771. No 70. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XJ]^ 

.<isire to repel the suspicion of his being one of that 
fraternity — ' Though I use the terms of art, do not 
injure me so much as to suspect I am a lawyer. I had 
as lief be a Scotchman. It is the encouragement given 
to disputes about titles, which has supported that iniqui- 
tous profession at the expense of the community.'* 
And in one of his letters to Lord Mansfield, he says in 
the same contemptuous strain — ' To investigate a ques- 
tion of law demands some labor and attention, though 
very little genius or sagacity. As a practical prof ession, 
the study of the law requires but a moderate portion of 
abilities. The learning of a pleader is usually on a 
level with his integrity t .... If there be any instances 
upon record, as some there are undoubtedly, of genius 
and morality united in a lawyer, they are distinguished 
by their singularity, and operate as exceptions.'! 

It is not easy in all cases to determine, how far we 
may safely draw a conclusion from the declarations 
made by an anonymous writer respecting himself; but 
we may, without much risk of error, assume it as 
a safe ground of argument, that it is next to impossible 
for a writer to put on a professional character, when it 
is not his real one, or to throw it off when it is, 
without betraying himself in his language or mode of 
thinking ; he cannot at all times be upon his guard. 
Now the declarations of Junius, that he was not a lawyer 
by profession, and his contemptuous opinions of the pro- 
fessors of the law, are consistently kept up throughout 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol. ] , p. 812. 

tit may be remarked, in passing, [that this term, pleader, 
appears to be here used rather in the popular than the profes- 
sional sense. 

t Junius, Letter 68. 



3tX INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

his letters ; they may therefore be assumed as truly 
indicating that he was not a lawyer. 

From considerations of this kind, that eminent Eng- 
lish jurist, Charles Butler, Esq. inferred, as he origin- 
ally expressed himself, that Junius ' was not a profound 
lawyer, from the gross inaccuracy of his legal expres- 
sions ;' as when he says ' in his Dedication to the English 
nation,' the power of king, lords and commons is not 
an arbitrary power. They are the trustees, not the 
owners of the estate. The fee simple is in ws.' Now 
in all trusts of the inheritance, Mr Butler remarks, Uhe 
fee simple is in the trustees.' * This learned writer, in 
the second volume of his Reminiscences, expresses him- 
self in still stronger terms, and does not merely suppose 
that Junius was not ' a profound' lawyer, but says, that 
a strong argument against his being ^ a lawyer' by pro- 
fession, might be supported by the great inaccuracy of 
some of his legal expressions. He then quotes a second 
time, the inaccurate expression just cited. With that 
candor, however, which distinguishes his writings, he 
opposes to this argument a remark made to him by Burke 
on that point — ' Junius,' said Mr Burke in reply, * proba- 
bly was thinking of those long terms for years, which you 
lawyers so dexterously carve out of the fee simple, while 
you leave the fee simple in possession of the owner.' On 
this same 'inaccuracy' of Junius, Mr Barker observes, 
* an intelligent legal friend thinks, that in that particular 
instance the mistake might have been made by a pro- 
fessional man, because many lawyers are much' less 
acquainted than Mr Butler is with the conveyancing de- 
partment of the law.'t 

* Butler's Reminiscences, vol. 1, p. 71, and Note, American 
edition. 
t Barker's Letters on the Authorship of Junius. London, 1828. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXI 

But, whatever weight should be given to the inference 
drawn from this single expression of Junius (which is 
only one circumstance among many in the course of the 
work), the public is now in possession of one piece of 
evidence, from the family of Lord Ashburton, which is 
not to be lightly rejected. Mr Butler, in a letter to Mr 
Barker of the 14th of June, 1828, long subsequent to the 
publication of the Reminiscences, states the following 
facts : ' It was once mentioned to me, that the late Lady 
Ashburton produced a proof-impression of one of Ju- 
nius's Letters, with corrections of the press in Mr Dun- 
ning's handwriting. This was afterwards explicitly con- 
firmed by a letter from a person present, when Lady 
Ashburton produced the letter! Being well acquainted 
with the last Lord Ashburton, I informed his lordship of 
the tale, and requested his sentiments upon it. He 
disclaimed, with indignation, his father's authorship of 
the letters ; said, no such proof-impression had been 
found among his papers, and that he had never heard 
his mother mention anything of the kind. He stated 
other circumstances, which led him to think, that the 
story deserved no attention.' * 

On an impartial review, then, of the evidence adduced 
in favor of the opinion expressed by Mr Heron and 
many others — that Lord Ashburton was the author of 
Junius, — we cannot resist the conclusion, that it is not 
supported. 

2. Hugh Macaulay Boyd. It is justly remarked, in 
the Preliminary Essay to Woodfall's Junius, that 'of 
all the pretenders, however, to the honor of having writ- 
ten Junius, Hugh Macaulay Boyd has been brought 
forward with the most confidence.' He adds, * yet of all 

* Baxker's Letters, preface, p. Ixiv. 
c 



XXU INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

of them, there is not one whose claims are more easily 
and completely refuted.' * Mr Butler, too, in a letter 
originally published in the Anti-Jacobin Review, and 
now republished in his Reminiscences, observes — 
' As for Macaulay Boyd's being the author of Junius it 
is a perfect joke ; no two characters can be more per- 
fectly unlike, than Boyd's and Junius's He must 

have been very young, when Junius's letters were 
written. 't 

The argument in favor of Boyd, as stated in Wood- 
fall's Junius, rests principally upon ' three slender facts.' 
Boyd's imitation of the style of Junius — the suspicion 
of Almon the printer respecting his handwriting — and 
an anecdote of Lord Irnham, *in conjunction with a 
few others of a nature merely collateral, and which, when 
separated from them, prove nothing whatever ' — though 
these gentlemen [the advocates of Boyd] undertake to 
regard it as a moral certainty that Macaulay Boyd did 
write the letters of Junius.' 

All these arguments have been, as we think, satisfac- 
torily answered, at large, in the Preliminary Essay 
above cited. We shall here advert to but two or three 
of them. 

The early letters of Junius (published under the sig- 
natures of Atticus and Lucius), were written when 
Boyd must have been on a visit to Ireland, in 1768 ; 
yet 'the rapidity with which they seized hold of the 
events of the moment and replied to the numerous vin- 
dications and apologies of the government party,' proves, 
that they 'must have been written, not at Belfast, but 
in London or its immediate vicinity.' | To this the 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol, i, p. 133. 

t Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i, p. 78, Amer. edition. 

X Woodfall's Junius, vol. i, p. 148, 150, 144. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXlll 

learned editor adds another fact of no small weight 

that the late Mr Woodfall ' made no scruple of denying 
the assertion [of Boyd's authorship] peremptorily ; ad- 
mitting at the same time, that he was not absolutely 
certain who did write them.' The first of these 'early 
letters' appeared, under the signature of Poplicola, in 
the Public Advertiser of April 28, 1767, ' when Boyd 
had not, as yet, attained his 21st year' — an age at 
which he could not have been competent to discuss the 
great subjects of the letters, and when it would not have 
been natural for him to have made such reflections as 
the following — ' after long experience of the world I 
affirm before God, I never knew a rogue who was not 
unhappy '* — with innumerable others of a similar cast. 
The pecuniary circumstances, too, of Boyd, who was 
described by Almon as * a broken gentleman without a 
guinea in his pocket, ' are totally inconsistent with those 
of Junius, as manifested on all occasions of his corres- 
pondence with Woodfall. But for further details of 
Boyd, we refer the reader to Woodfall's Junius. 

3. Edmund Burke. It was justly remarked many 
years ago, that ' the style, the favorite phraseology, the 
methods of reasoning, several of the principles, the topics 
and images of illustration in the letters of Junius, are 
as entirely different from those in the works of Burke, as 
it is possible for the effusions of one great mind to be from 
those of another, on the same class of subjects.' t Since 
that period, the claim in favor of Burke has been renew- 
ed by his biographer, Mr Prior. But, as Mr Butler ob- 
serves, ' he has not removed even one of the objections 
made to Mr Burke's authorship in the former volume of 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol. i p. 152, note, 
t Heron's Junius, vol. i, p. 67, American edition. 



XXIV INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

the Reminiscences ; and the facts adduced by the biog- 
rapher in support of it, fall very short of proof In the 
volume alluded to, Mr Butler had observed, that Burke 
spoke of Junius ' in terms of disgust.' * This learned 
writer then makes the following discrimination in the 
characteristics of Burke and Junius. ' Mr Burke gen- 
erahzes every thing ; Junius dwells forever on particu- 
lars ; Junius frequently leaves half his meaning to be 
guessed ; Burke displays all. Can any reason be assign- 
ed for attributing to Mr Burke the personal hatred 
which Junius evidently had for his late majesty, the 
Duke of Bedford, or for Lord Mansfield? Those, who 
knew the very lofty notions which Mr Burke entertain- 
ed of himself and his own ministerial powers and qualifi- 
cations, must think it impossible that he should have 
written the line — ' I accept a simile from Burke, a 
sarcasm from Barre.'f Those too, who know the labor 
which any literary labor cost Mr Burke, his endless blots, 
emendations and transcriptions, and ultimately his 
private impressions, still blotted and still amended, 
must be sensible how irreconcilable all this is with the 
fecundity and rapidity of Junius.' 

Mr Butler then adds, what is of a more decisive 
character — that * on several most important points, 
Burke and Junius were in direct opposition to each 
other ; Burke was a partizan of Lord Rockingham ; 
Junius, of George Grenville. On the Stamp Act, on 
Triennial Parliaments, they were completely at vari- 
ance. Junius attached much importance to city poIi-> 
tics ; in these Burke never appeared.* Nor is it credi- 

* Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i. p. 69, &c. 
t Junivis's Letters. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXV 

ble, as Mr Butler and others have remarked, that Burke 
would have spoken of himself in such terms of eulogy 
as he applies to Junius, in one of his speeches in the 
House of Commons : ' How comes this Junius,' says he, 
' to have broke through the cobwebs of the law, and to 
range uncontrolled, unpunished, through the land ? 
The myrmidons of the court have been long, and are 
still, pursuing hini in vain. They will not spend their 
time upon me, or you, or you. No! they disdain such 
vermin when the mighty boar of the forest, that has 
broke through all their toils, is before them. But what 
will all their efforts avail ? No sooner has he wounded 
one than he strikes down another dead at his feet. For 
my part, when I saw his attack-upon the King, I own my 
blood ran cold. I thought he had ventured too far, and 
that there was an end to his triumphs. Not that he had 
not asserted many truths; yes, sir, there are in that com- 
position many bold truths, by which a wise prince might 
profit. It was the rancour and venom with which I 
was struck. In these respects the North Briton is as 
inferior to him, as in strength, wit and judgment. But 
while I expected in this daring flight his final ruin and 
fall, behold him rising still higher, and coming down 
souse upon both houses of parliament ! Yes, he did 
make you his quarry, and you still bleed from the 
wounds of his talons. You crouched, and still crouch, 
beneath his rage. Nor has he dreaded the terrors of 
ycnir brow, sir;* for he has attacked even you — he 
has — and I believe you have no reason to triumph in 
the encounter. In short, after carrying away our royal 

* Sir Fletcher Norton (Speaker of the House of Commons), 
who was distinguished by a pair of large, black eye-brows. 
C* 



XXVI INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

eagle in his pounces, and dashing him against a rock, 
lie has laid you prostrate ; and king, lords, and com- 
mons are but the sports of his fury. Vfere he a member 
of this house, what might not be expected from his know- 
ledge, his firmness and integrity? He would easily 
be known by his contempt of all danger, by his penetra- 
tion, by his vigor. Nothing would escape his vigilance 
and activity. Bad ministers could conceal nothing 
from his sagacity, nor could promises nor threats induce 
him to conceal anything from the public' 

In addition to these circumstances, Mr Burke, in the 
year 1784, instituted a prosecution against Junius's 
printer, Woodfall ; and, though considerable interest was 
made with Mr Burke to induce him to drop the prose- 
cution, in different stages, he was inexorable, and pur- 
sued it to a verdict ' with the utmost acrimony,' * and 
obtained ,^100 damages, ' the whole of which was paid 
to the prosecutor.' t Besides this, his political conduct, 
was wholly at variance with the supposition of his au- 
thorship. Among other instances, when Mr Grenville 
published his ' Present State of the Nation ' (in 1769), 
Burke immediately answered it, and arraigned the au- 
thor and his friends with a vehemence peculiar to him- 
selft 

It is also a fact, that Burke always disclaimed the 
authorship. As long ago as the year 1779, Dr John- 
son observed — ' I should have believed Burke to be 
Junius, because I know no man but Burke who is ca- 
pable of writing these letters ; but Burke spontaneously 
denied it to me. The case would have been different, 

* Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i, page 81. 
t Woodfall's Junius, vol. i, page 102, note. 
t Ibid. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XVlI 

had I asked him if he was the author ; a man so ques- 
tioned, as to an anonymous publication, may think he 
has a right to deny it.' * On another occasion he is 
stated to have denied it, as related in the following an- 
ecdote ; Dean Marley, who was at a watering place with 
him, at a distance from London, suspected him of the 
authorship ; but upon the appearance of one of Junius's 
letters and an immediate reply to it, which could not 
have been made by Burke at that distance, Dean Mar- 
ley said to him — 'Now, Burke, I am clear that you 
are not the author of Junius ; ' and Burke answered — 
' I could not write like Junius, and if I could, I would 
not,' f He is also said to have ' expressly and satisfac- 
torily denied it to Mr William Draper, who purposely 
interrogated him upon the subject ; the truth of which 
denial is, moreover, corroborated by the testimony of 
the late Mr ¥/oodfall, who repeatedly declared that 
neither of them [Courtney nor Burke] was the writer.' J 
One of Mr Burke's biographers, Dr Bissett, after 
briefly and candidly stating the general arguments for 
and against his authorship, comes to the following re- 
markable conclusion, which is believed to be peculiar 
to himself ' Were I,' says he, ' to hazard an opinion 
on the subject, it would be, that Burke was not most 
frequently the writer of Junius's letters, if he was of 
any. Though very excellent, they are not equal, nor 
peculiarly similar, to his productions. They have been 
imputed to Lord George Germain [Lord Sackville], but 
I cannot accede to that opinion. Lord George is close 

* Boswell's Life of Johnson, vol. i, page 83, American edit, 
t Letter of General Cockburne to the Editor of the Dubhn 
Magazine, as cited in Mr Barker's Letters, page 239. 
t Woodfall's Junius, Preliminary Essay, page 101. 



XXVlll INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

and correct ; in those qualities he resembles Junius ; 
he does not abound in point and imagery ; and in those 
qualities does not resemble Junius. I think Lord George 
Germain not Junius, because inferior to the latter ; 
Burke, because superior.' * 

Another, and a popular biographer, Mr Prior, in- 
clines to the opinion that Burke was the author of Ju- 
nius. His reasoning on the point is certainly remark- 
able ; and, if resorted to in other cases, would lead to 
results as remarkable. He says, in the first place, that 
' internal evidence, so far as regards the style, is not 
.to be looked for, where the aim was such profound con- 
cealment.' Undoubtedly the author would desire to 
conceal himself under an assumed style, and might for 
a short time, in a single letter or two, succeed in his 
attempt. But, unless he were already known to 
the public as a writer, there would be no necessity of as- 
suming this disguise ; and if he had written enough to 
have formed a manner which already distinguished him 
from others, his habit and manner would, in a course of 
steady writing for four or five years, frequently break 
out and betray him. Besides, why do we argue that 
Junius's Letters themselves were all written by one 
person, unless from their generally uniform character 
in style and matter ? And why are the advocates of 
different candidates for the authorship called upon to 
produce specimens of acknowledged productions of their 
candidates, in proof of their claims? 

This biographer also adopts the common mode of ar- 
gument on another point ; that the attacks and sneers 
aimed at his candidate by Junius, and the incompati- 

* Bissett's Life of Burke, vol. i, p. 164, 2d edition. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXIX 

bility of their political opinions, are to be considered 
as profound stratagems of war, to which the secret ene- 
my resorted, the better to conceal himself. On this 
latter point, the reasoning of the able reviewer above 
quoted is a sufficient reply — Junius had certain po- 
litical objects in view, which he could only hope to ef- 
fect by the aid of his political friends ; he could not, 
therefore, have the childish folly to attempt, under a 
disguise, to write down the same political friends and 
their measures, whom he was strenuously exerting him- 
self in public to advance and defend, 

4. Dr Butler^ Bishop of Hereford ; formerly Secretary 
to the Right Hon. Bilson Legge, Chancellor of the Ex- 
chequer, and father to the present Lord Stawell. On 
the subject of his claims, it has been observed — 'that 
although he was a man of some ability, and occasionally 
a political writer, yet ' he never discovered those talents 
that could in any respect put him upon an equality with 
Junius.'* To which may be added the opinion of * a 
friend of Dr Butler's and who himself took an active 
part in the politics of the times,' as expressed in ' a 
letter to a high official character of the present day.' 
He says — ' from all that I was ever able to learn of the 
Bishop's personal character, he was incapable of dis- 
covering or feeling those rancorous sentiments, so un- 
becoming his character as a Christian, and his station as 
a prelate, expressed towards the Duke of Grafton, Lord 
North, Sir William Draper, and others — more especial- 
ly the king.'t 

5. The Earl of Chatham. This celebrated man, 
has been often mentioned among the conjectured auth- 

* Woodfall's Junius, Preliminary Essay, p. 120. 
t Ibid, p. 121. 



XXX INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

ors of Junius ; but, though a general and indistinct view 
of the evidence, in a mass and on one side only, might 
leave an impression favorable to this opinion, yet the 
moment we begin to analyze it, the impression is dissi- 
pated. The whole course of opinions maintained or 
combated by Junius on several fundamental points in, 
the politics of that day, were in direct opposition to those 
of Lord Chatham. ' He could not ' as an able writer 
before quoted observes, ' disguise his political connexion, 
because it could not be concealed without defeating his 
general purpose.' * Besides this, the severe attacks of 
Junius upon Lord Chatham from the year 1767 to 1769, 
not exceeded and perhaps not equalled in rancour by any 
of his letters, and afterwards his unmeasured panegyric 
of that eminent man, are utterly incompatible with the 
supposition of his authorship ; as will abundantly ap- 
pear in the course of the following letters. 

It is a little remarkable, that this hypothesis, which 
was started several years ago (we believe it is mention- 
ed in the Monthly Review of 1810, among other places, 
but we have not the volume at hand), should be revived 
at the present time, simultaneously, by one writer in 
England, Mr Swinden, and by one in our own country, 
Dr Benjamin Waterhouse. The modest and unassum- 
ing tone of the former, which is a small pamphlet, forbid 
our speaking of it in such terms as its slender and 
unsatisfactory contents would justify. When a writer 
who undertakes to discuss a subject, of all others, 
requiring careful examination and minute accuracy, 
comes so ill prepared to his task, that he confounds Mr 
George Grenville with Lord Grenville — and feels so 
insecure in his historical knowledge, that he speaks of 

* Edinburgh Review, vol. 44, p. 5. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXl 

the most notorious events as of occurrences which he 
has 'understood^ to have happened, his readers will 
take little satisfaction in accompanying him through an 
intricate investigation. The work of our learned country- 
man, Dr Waterhouse, who is a veteran in the corps of 
our American literati, as well as in his own profession, 
is of a very different character. The writer of the fol- 
lowing letters, p. 230, considers it the best which he has 
seen on the authorship of Junius ; though he cannot, of 
course, consider the argument of Dr Waterhouse as satis- 
factory. For further remarks upon it we refer the reader 
to the whole of his 32d letter ; as we also do to the 
whole series of the letters, for an answer to the argu- 
ments which are urged in favor of Lord Chatham's au- 
thorship. 

6. Dunning. — See Ashburton. 

7. Samuel Dyer. He is described by Boswell as ' a 
most learned and ingenious member of the Literary 
Club, for whose understanding and attainments Dr John- 
son had great respect.'* But he died September 14, 
1772 ; and Junius continued to write for some months 
after that ; his last letter being dated January 19, 1773. t 

8. Henry Flood. It is a sufficient answer to the 
claim made in his favor, that he was absent from Lon- 
don (being in Ireland) throughout a great part of the 
summer of 1768, and at a time when Junius was con- 
stantly corresponding with his printer, and with a 
rapidity which could not have been maintained, even at 
a hundred, and occasionally at less than fifty miles dis- 
tance from the British metropolis.| 

* Boswell's Life of Johnson, vol. i, p. 374. 

t Woodfall's Junius, Preliminary Essay, vol. i, p. 100. 

X Ibid, 157. 



XXXll INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

9. Sir Philip Francis. The claims made in favor of 
this gentleman have for some time past attracted much 
attention. The volume published in support of them, 
by Mr Taylor, under the title of Junius Identified^ 
reached a second edition in England in 1818, and has 
been once published in America. Of this work Mr 
Butler observes — ' the external evidence is very strong ; 
so strong, perhaps, that if he had been tried upon it for 
a libel, and the case had rested upon the facts from 
which this evidence is formed, the judge would have 
directed the jury to find him guilty. But the internal 
evidence against him, from the inequality of his ac- 
knowledged writings, is also very strong ; if the able 
author of the article " Junius " in the Edinburgh Review 
[for November, 1817], had not professed a different 
opinion, the present writer would have pronounced it 
decisive.'* And by way of reply to the argument found- 
ed on some passages of Sir Philip's writings, Mr 
Butler justly asks — ' Are the glow and loftiness discern- 
ible in every page of Junius once visible in any of these 
extracts? Where do we find in the writings of Sir 
Philip, those thoughts that breathe, those words that 
burn, which Junius scatters in every page ? A single 
drop of the cohra [de] capello, which falls from Junius 
so often. 't 

In these sentiments, every reader, who is capable of 
feeling the force of English style, will concur. Mr 
Butler, after a short discussion of the question, comes 
to the conclusion, that ' all external evidence is in favor 
of Sir Philip, all internal evidence is against him. Thus 
the argument on each side, neutralizes the argument 
on the other, and the pretension of Sir Philip vanishes.' 

* Reminiscences, vol. i, p. 81. 
t Ibid, p. 83. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXlll 

After this view of the case, Mr Butler argues, that a 
third hypothesis is necessary, to which he himself in- 
clines — that Sir Philip might have acted as the aman- 
uensis of Junius, and might occasionally have given in- 
formation or hints to his principal, and therefore might 
properly be called his collaborator.' Mr Butler, how- 
ever, very candidly adds, that besides the fact of Sir 
Philip's being a young man at the time, the circum- 
stances of fortune, intercourse with the world, and the 
offers of indemnity to Woodfall, are all inconsistent 
with the claims made on his behalf* 

The deference manifested by Mr Butler for the 
opinion expressed in the Edinburgh Review will be di- 
minished by an article since published in the same jour- 
nal (for June, 1826, already quoted), in which it is ob- 
served — ' The writer of the Letters of Junius is still 
undiscovered. The only claim entitled to discussion is 
that set up for Sir Philip Francis, in spite of that gen- 
tleman himself, by Mr Taylor in the very ingenious 
book, too boldly entitled ' Junius Identified.^ The 
able writer of this article, however, thinks, from cir- 
cumstances in the case, that we ' may probably infer, 
that Sir Philip was in the confidence of Junius, and 
perhaps his amanuensis.' f 

In opposition to the claim of Sir Philip Francis, Mr 
E. H. Barker has lately, with vast labor, collected in a 
volume of nearly six hundred pages, all the evidence 
which was accessible, by means of an extensive corres- 
pondence with various persons, who would be likely to 
possess any facts in relation to the sabject. Those 
readers who have given any attention to this claim, if 

* Reminiscences, vol. i, page 83. 

t Edinburgh Review, vol. xliv, page 9, for June, 1826. 
d 



XXXIV INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

doubts have hitherto existed in their minds, must, we 
think, upon a careful and impartial consideration of the 
great mass of evidence now brought together, have 
their doubts removed. In our humble judgment, this 
claim is completely demolished. 

It is impossible, in the limits prescribed to these re- 
marks, to give even an abridgment of the numerous 
facts and reasonings exhibited against this claim ; but 
a few of the principal ones must be noticed. 

One of them is, that although it may have happened 
that Sir Philip Francis had feelings of revenge to grati- 
fy, for slighted services, and might, from that motive, 
have exposed the transactions of the War Office, yet, 
unluckily for this hypothesis, ' Junius had sprung up 
two or three years before ; at first, under other names, 
and then under that Roman appellation, Junius ; ' and 
this hypothesis, too, as Mr Barker has observed, as- 
sumes, that Sir Philip, while only twentyseven years of 
age, and a clerk in that oflice, should have ventured 
into a political discussion that put at hazard his own 
advancem.ent ; and that he must have begun his lite- 
rary career by a series of papers, perfect in their style 
of composition, and his political career by professing 
hose high public principles which belonged only to 
experienced statesmen.* 

Another formidable objection, stated at large by Mr 
Barker, in the language of his correspondent, is, the 
hostilhy shown for a long time by Junius to Lord Chat- 
ham ; which, it would be contrary to reason to suppose, 
could have proceeded from a man, who, like Sir Philip, 
had been patronised by that noble lord, and was under 

* Barker's Letters, pp. 5, 6. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXV 

such deep obligations to him.* Mr Barker, it is true, 
thinks that the author cited by him (Mr Coventry), 
does not state this part of the case with perfect fair- 
ness, because he omits to mention that Junius did, at a 
subsequent period, speak in warm commendation of 
Lord Chatham. But it may be still replied, that until 
some adequate cause shall be assigned for an opposite 
course of conduct on the part of Sir Philip towards 
Lord Chatham at the two different periods — that is, 
bitter enmity to him in the outset, and conciliatory, and 
even friendly language accompanied with high pane- 
gyric, afterwards — the mere existence of such hostility 
on the part of the protege towards his patron still leaves 
much weight in this objection. Upon the hypothesis, how- 
ever, which is adopted in the following Letters, namely, 
that Lord Temple was the author of Junius, this same 
hostility and subsequent reconciliation become an essen- 
tial part of the proof Mr Barker justly observes, that 
' in order to identify Sir Philip with Junius from the 
sentiments avowed by each about Lord Chatham, Mr 
Taylor is required to prove, that Sir Philip ever, at any 
period of his whole life, sympathized with Junius in per- 
sonal hatred and political hostility, or even in the 
smallest degree of personal and political aversion to 
Lord Chatham; if he cannot produce such a proof, 
then I maintain, that he ought to abandon his opinion 
as quite untenable from this consideration alone. 't 

The argument in favor of Sir Philip Francis, which 
is founded on the resemblance of his style to that of Ju- 
nius, loses much of its weight by the fact, that he never 

* See also Gentleman's Magazine for October, 1828. 
t Barker's Letters, p. 30, seqq. where the argument is carried 
oat at large. 



XXXVl INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

published anything till several years after Junius had 
ceased to write ; and he therefore had the same oppor- 
tunity with many other writers of forming his style upon 
that model. And, even with that advantage, though 
several resemblances in mere language have been in- 
dustriously brought together, yet the elevated and sus- 
tained tone of thinking, which characterises Junius as 
much as a lofty and steady flight distinguishes the royal 
bird above all others, is not, in our judgment, to be 
found in Sir Philip Francis. 

10. Mr Glover, the author of Leonidas. This writer is 
one of the only three, whose claims in the opinion of 
Mr Butler, ' deserve any consideration ; ' the other two 
are Burke and Sir Philip Francis. ' To support the 
pretensions of Mr Glover,' says Mr Butler, ' no evidence 
is adduced, except that something of the high Whig prin- 
ciples of Junius is discoverable in the volume which has 
been published of Glover^s Memoirs ; and, that Glover 
is known to have lived in an elevated line of society, in 
which these principles were professed.' But this evi- 
dence, as Mr. Butler candidly admits, ' amounts to little ; 
and the style of his " Memoirs" is very unlike that of 
Junius.' * It is unnecessary to add any thing further 
on the claims of Mr Glover. 

11. William Gerard Hamilton, familiarly known by the 
appellation of Single-Speech Hamilton. Of him the 
editor of Woodfall's Junius observes — ' he had neither 
energy nor personal courage enough for such an under- 
taking ;' and * solemnly denied ' the authorship ' to Mr 
Courtney in his last illness, as that gentleman has per- 
sonally informed the editor;' the truth of which denial, 

* Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i, p. 100 — 101. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXVU 

he adds, ' is moreover corroborated by the testimony of 
the late Mr Wood fall, who repeatedly declared, that 
neither of them [Hamilton and Burke] was the writer 
of these compositions,' * Besides this evidence, Mr Ma- 
lone, in his preface to Hamilton's Parliamentary Logic, 
states, that Hamilton made a ' solemn asseveration near 
the time of his death, that he was not the author of 
Junius.' He adds the following anecdote, which at 
once goes to the disclaiming of the authorship, and con- 
trasts the literary taste of the two writers — 'The figures 
and allusions of Junius are often of so different a race 
from those which our author [Hamilton] would have 
used, that he never spoke of some of them without the 
^strongest disapprobation; and particularly, when a 
friend, for the purpose of drawing him out, affected to 
think him the writer of these papers, and, bantering 
him on the subject, taxed him with that passage, in 
which a nobleman then in a high office, is said to have 
"travelled through every sign in the political zodiac, 
from the scorpion, in which he stung Lord Chatham, to 
the hopes of a virgin,'' &c., as if this imagery were 
much in his style. Mr Hamilton, with great vehe- 
mence exclaimed — " had I written such a sentence as 
that, I should have thought I had forfeited all preten- 
sions to good taste in composition forever." ' 

In addition to these facts, it will be al.so recollected, 
that Hamilton was chancellor of the exchequer in Ire- 
land from 1TG3 to 17S4, during which period all Ju- 
nius's Letters appeared ; and that he was also against 
a parliamentary reform, which with Junius was a favor- 
ite object. t The anecdote which has contributed to 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol. i, p. 100—101. 
t Woodfall's Junius, vol. i, p. 118. 



XXXVlll INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

fix the authorship on Hamilton — that he told one of 
his fi-iends the contents of a- letter of Junius before its 
publication, is sufficiently accounted for, as has been 
often remarked, by supposing that Woodfall might have 
read it to him the day before it happened to be printed. 

12. Major-general Charles Lee. So much importance 
had been attached to the claim made in favor of Gen- 
eral Lee (originating in a statement of Mr T. Rodney, 
published in the Wilmington Mirror, State of Dela- 
ware), that the Editor of Woodfall's Junius has made 
a minute and careful comparison of dates, which con- 
clusively proves, that it is wholly unsupported. The 
results were, briefly — that Lee's great distance from 
England, being on the continent of Europe at that 
time, and his well known politics, render it impossible 
that he should have written the letters.* Mr Barker 
adds — that * General Lee had the requisite ardor of 
mind and the leisure, but wanted the spirit of industry 
admitted to have been indispensably necessary for Ju- 
nius.'! 

13. Charles Lloyd. That eminent scholar, the late 
Dr Parr, in a letter to Charles Butler, Esq., dated 
April 9, 182:2, says, in his usual emphatic manner, — 
' Your account of Junius is very entertaining ; but I 
tell you, diiid peremptorily tell you, that the real Junius 
was secretary to George Grenville, of whom you can- 
not forget, that having ceased to be prime minister, he 
was so provoked as to attend an angry county meeting 
in Bucks. The name of Junius was Lloyd. Lord 
Grenville knows, the late Marquis of Buckingham 
once dropped three or four significant words ; but I 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol. i. p. 120. 
\ Barker's Letters, p. 43. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXlX 

will tell you more when we meet in London.'* The 
same opinion is expressed with equal confidence in 
another letter from Dr Parr to Mr Butler — ' I, for 
these forty years, have had the firmest conviction, that 
Junius was Mr Lloyd, brother of Philip Lloyd, Dean 
of Norwich, and secretary to George Grenville.'f This 
learned writer has also noted down the same firm be- 
lief in the Catalogue of his Library, under the article 
Junius : ' The writer of Junius was Mr Lloyd, secre- 
tary to George Grenville, and brother to Philip Lloyd, 
dean of Norwich. This will one day or other be gen- 
erally acknowledged. S. P.'t 

But this long settled and unshaken opinion of Dr 
Parr is opposed by the strong fact stated by the 
Editor of Woodfall's Junius — that Lloyd was on his 
death-bed at the date of Junius's final letter, January 
19, 1773 — his death having taken place in three days 
afterwards, January 22, 1773 ; and yet the letter contains 
sufficient proof of having been written in the possession of 
full health and spirits,' &c.§ This single fact is thought, 
by the editor here cited, to be conclusive evidence against 
Mr Lloyd's claim. It has, however, been considered as 
far from being conclusive by several writers ; some of 
whom have observed, that a man might be well able to 
write such a letter, as the one last mentioned, even 
three days before his death ; that the letter itself is 

* Butler's Reminiscences, vol. ii., p. 241, American edit. 
Lett. xii. 

t Butler's Reminiscence, vol. ii, p. 223, Letter ix, without a 
date. 

\ Biblioth. Parriana, p. 407. 

§ Woodfall's Junius, vol. i. p. 100 of Prelim. Essay. 



Xl INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

very short, and therefore proves nothing of intellectual 
ability.'* 

Mr Butler is of this opinion ; and he considers it 
a strong argument in favor of Lloyd, that when he 
died, Junius ceased to write. t But there are, obvious- 
ly, many other reasons than natural death for a dis- 
continuance of the Letters. In the letter now imme- 
diately under consideration he gives sufficient reasons 
for suspending his labors, though invited by Woodfall 
to resume his pen. He says — ' In the present state 
of things, if I were to write again, I must be as silly 
as any of the horned cattle that run mad through the 
city, or as any one of your wise aldermen. I meant 
the cause and the public. Both are given up. I feel 
for the honor of this country, when I see that there are 
not ten men in it who will unite and stand together 
upon any one question. But it is all alike, vile and 
contemptible. 't The editor of Heron's Junius also, in 
commenting upon an expression in the Dedication to 
the English Nation — ' if Junius lives, you shall often 
be reminded of it,' i. e. the dangers to which their 
apathy exposes them — makes the following just re- 
marks : * We do not know that this promise was ever 
fulfilled. Yet it is not from this to be inferred, that 
the author of these letters died immediately after he 
had collected them. A change of mind, an alteration 
of circumstances, a thousand causes which we cannot 
estimate, might intervene, to make Junius drop the 
pen forever, after he had formed a monument of ge- 

* Barker's Letters, p. 252. 
t Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i, p. 252. 

X Junius's Private Letters to Woodfall, Letter 63, in Wood- 
fall's Junius, vol. i, p. 255. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xH 

nius and public virtue, which it is not easy to be sup- 
posed that he could have by any subsequent efforts 
excelled.' * 

These views are entirely in accordance with the 
remarks of the late Editor of Woodfall's Junius, who 
says — 'In truth it must have been, as he himself 
states it, insanity, to have persisted any longer in 
anything like a regular attack ; Lord Camden had 
declined to act upon his suggestion ; the great pha- 
lanx of the Whig party was broken up by the death of 
Mr George Grenville ; the vanity and extreme jealousy 
of Oliver and Home had introduced the most acrimo- 
nious divisions into the Society for supporting the Bill 
of Rights : and the leading patriots of the city had so 
intermixed their own private interests and their own 
private squabbles with the public cause, as to render 
this cause itself contemptible in the eye of the people 
at large. He had already tried, but in vain, to awaken 
the different contending parties to a sense of better 
and more honorable motives ; to induce them to forego 
their selfish and individual disputes, and to make a 
common sacrifice of them upon the altar of the consti- 
tution. Yet, at the same time, so small were his ex- 
pectations of success, so mean his opinion of the pre- 
tensions of most of the leading demagogues of the day 
to a real love of their country, and so grossly had he 
himself been occasionally misrepresented by them, that, 
in his confidential intercourse, he bade his correspond- 
ent beware of entrusting himself to them. ' Nothing,' 
says he, * can be more express than my declaration 
against long parliaments ; try Mr Wilkes once more, 

* Heron's Junius, vol. i, p. xvii, of Dedication, in not©, 



Xli INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

(who teas in private possession of his sentiments upon 
this subject) ; speak for me in a most friendly, hnijii'm 
tone, that I icill not submit to be any longer aspersed. 
Between ourselves, let me recommend it to you to be 
much on your guard w'lih patriots J* 

These are, certainly, good reasons for his ceasing to 
write ; and, upon the hypothesis that Lord Temple was 
Junius, they w ill be found to have been the true ones. 

Besides; this letter of January 19, 1773, was ac- 
knowledged by Woodfall, in his reply of the 7th March 
following (in the Public Advertiser of the 8th March) 
as usual, and his ' signals ' for Junius again thrown 
out ; which would hardly have been done, if, as many 
believe, Woodfall knew Junius ; for at the time of this 
acknowledgment Lloyd had been dead a month and a 
half.t In that reply, too, Woodfall apologizes (March 
7), for not sending the copies of the Letters, which he 
was to get bound for the author, by informing him that 
he did not get them out of the binder's hands till the 
day before, March 6. He must then have sent them, 
as Mr G. Coventry observes, in his correspondence 
with Mr Barker, to the place which had been appoint- 
ed by Junius, and this was not done till six weeks after 
Lloyd's death. If then, Junius had been dead at that 
time, the books would probably have remained at the 
place, to which they were sent (the Coffee-House), and 
might have led to a discovery of the author at that 
period, 

13. John Roberts. It is sufficient to state here, as 
in the case of Mr Dyer, the simple fact, that Roberts 

* Woodfall's Junivis, Preliminary Essay, vol. i, p. 55. 
t Woodfall, Junius, vol. i, 256, note. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xliii 

died July 13, 1772, and that Junius continued to write 
six months after that time. 

14. The Rev. Philip Rosenhagen. His pretensions, 
says the Editor of Woodfall's Junius, are hardly worth 
noticing. He was ' a school-fellow of Mr H. S. Wood- 
fall, continued on terms of acquaintance with him in 
subsequent life, and occasionally wrote for the Public 
Advertiser, but was repeatedly declared by Mr Wood- 
fall — who must have a competent evidence of the fact 
— not to be the author' * To this may be added, that 
' he was of foreign origin, and could not have those 
English feelings in matters of politics which so forcibly 
speak in every line ' of Junius. t 

15. Lord George Sackville, or Lord George Ger- 
main. The claims, which have been often made on be- 
half of this celebrated man, have lately become a sub- 
ject of greater interest than ever to American readers, 
in consequence of an ingeniously written publication 
from the pen of an American, in a little volume enti- 
tled, with some confidence, as we think, ' Junius Un- 
masked, or Lord George Sackville proved to be Junius^ ' 
printed at Boston, 1828, but dated, in the preface, 

' B ,' which we presume is intended for some other 

place than Boston. This volume was called forth by 
that of Mr Coventry, which was published in London 
(1825) in favor of Lord Sackville's authorship — a 
point, which the American writer thinks Mr Coventry 
' has proved beyond any reasonable doubt.' This learn- 
ed writer, however, adds to Mr Coventry's evidence 
in the case ' a class of proofs yet stronger and more 
irresistible, which he [Mr Coventry] has in a great 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol. i, p. 121. 
t Heron's Junius, vol. i, p. C8. 



Xliv INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

measure, overlooked — I mean, the internal proofs de- 
rived from habits of thought and peculiarities of style.' * 
So decisive does this writer consider the whole evi- 
dence to be, and so confident does he feel in the results 
of his examination, that he hopes ' it will not be thought 
that there is anything unbecoming or presumptuous ' 
in the title of his book — * Sackville proved to be Ju- 
nius.' ' 1 am satisfied,' says he, ' the proof is made 
out ; and I flatter myself others will be satisfied.' He 
afterwards adds — ' If the authorship of Junius be es- 
tablished, it may prevent, for the future, much idle 
speculation on the subject.' t 

How differently does the same evidence strike differ- 
ent minds ; and how little hope is there, especially in 
this inquisitive nation of ours, that we shall repress 
what this respectable writer calls ' idle ' speculation ! 
Since the publication of his ingenious work in 1828, 
our own press, to say nothing of the English, has al- 
ready issued two large books, and the present volume 
makes the third, all denying the claim.s of his candi- 
date. Lord Sackville, and each ascribing Junius to a 
different author. Justly may he exclaim with the des- 
pairing ancient — O frustra siisccpti mei lahorcs ! O 
spes fallaccs ! O cogitationes inanes mecs ! 

The strong opinion, above quoted, of a writer who 
appears to have given more attention than the mass of 
readers to this controversy, and who shows himself to 
have a just perception of the force of English style, de- 
mands something more than the passing notice, with 
which he dismisses the claims of every other candidate 
than his own — when he says — ' I think it imnecessa- 

* Junius Unmasked, preface, p. ii. 
t Ibid, p. V. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XlV 

ry to beat down the slight pretensions set up in favor 
of almost all these claimants.' * 

How many and who of the other claimants this 
writer considers to have but ' slight pretensions/ does 
not distinctly appear ; but we should ourselves agree 
to his remark so far as this, that their pretensions will 
now, as we believe, prove to have been unfounded, 
however ingeniously they may have heretofore been 
supported. 

The arguments brought together by this writer in 
favor of Lord Sackville are — 1. That he was more 
suspected than any other person at the time when Ju- 
nius appeared — 2. That he had the requisite talents 
and learning — 3. That he had ' those strong motives, 
which only can account for the letters of Junius ' — 
4. That the author of Junius had been a soldier, as 
Sackville had been — 5. That he had the friendships 
and animosities which are indicated in Junius's Let- 
ters — 6. That Junius, as 'can hardly be doubted,* 
was a member of the House of Commons, as was 
Sackville — 7. That ' Lord Sackville held the political 
sentiments expressed by Junius — 8. That Junius was 
not an Irishman, yet had lived in Ireland — 9. That 
he was not a lawyer, but a man of rank and independ- 
ent fortune — 10. That one of the letters of Junius had 
upon it the words ' Pall-Mall,' near the signature, and 
that Lord Sackville resided in that part of London — 
IL The inquiry made by that ' fool,' Swinney, of Lord 
Sackville, to know if he was the author of Junius, only 
a day or two before it was mentioned to Woodfall by 
Junius — 12. The deep anxiety of Junius to remain 
concealed — 13. The anecdote related by Cumberland, 

* Junius Unmasked, pp. 9, 10. 
e 



Xlvi INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

that Lord Sackville, just before his death, mentioned 
' in jest,' that he was among the suspected authors, 
and his lordship did not make a formal denial of the truth 
of that suspicion — 14. Lord Sackville's last interview 
with Lord Mansfield, in which he earnestly asked forgive- 
ness, if he had ever been unjust to his great merits, or 
forgetful of his many favors, &.c. 

The greater part of the reasons adduced by this 
writer, in support of Lord Sackville's authorship, are 
alike applicable, though perhaps not to the same ex- 
tent in every instance, to many other leading men of 
that period ; and a very satisfactory answer to the most 
important of them is given by a correspondent of Mr 
Barker's; whom that gentleman characterizes as an ' in- 
telligent friend to whom he owes many literary obliga- 
tions.' That correspondent observes — ' The cause as- 
signed [page 104 of Butler's Reminiscences] for Lord 
George Sackville's enmity to the King and Lord Mans- 
field is evidently erroneous ; for his lordship's trial and 
disgrace on account of the battle of Minden took place 
in the reign of George II. His lordship's animosity, in- 
deed, towards the Marquis of Granby might well be 
accounted for by what happened at Minden. But 
neither his late Majesty nor Lord Mansfield, it is be- 
lieved, had any concern in the prosecution ; besides, 
why should Lord George have stifled his resentment 
for nine or ten years ? Numerous occasions had offer- 
ed, long before Junius's Letters were written, for at- 
tacking the Sovereign and the Chief Justice. It ap- 
pears, however, by Junius's early letters under various 
signatures, that his opposition to government arose from 
the dismissal of the Grenville administration, and the re- 
peal of the American Stamp Act. What evidence have we 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xlvii 

that Lord George Sackville teas attached to the Gren- 
villes? Another objection to the claims of Lord 
George arises from his early life and habits, which 
were military ; whereas Junius professed profound 
constitutional knowledge.'* 

This reasoning, founded on general and comprehen- 
sive views, deserves attention ; and it is not outweighed 
by various little circumstances, which, apparently in 
conflict with it, are thrown together into the opposite 
scale of evidence. To the arguments adduced in this 
discussion, we should apply the old and sound maxim 
— that we must be governed, not by their number, but 
by their weight — ponderantur, non numerantur. 

We may add one or two further considerations to 
those urged by the writer just quoted. Junius was at 
first extremely hostile to Lord Chatham ; but was after- 
wards reconciled to him. Now it does not appear that 
Lord Sackville's opinions of that distinguished man 
ever underwent such an entire change. This change, 
however, did take place in Lord Temple's feelings, as 
will appear throughout the present letters ; and it 
exactly coincided, in time, with the open quarrel be- 
tween him and Lord Chatham. We think, too, that 
the writer above quoted, by Mr Barker, concedes 
more than the facts required in respect to the actual 
hostility of Junius to Lord Granby. It is abundantly 
evident, that there was no personal animosity against 
him on the part of Junius ; on the contrary, Junius 
says, he ' lamented his death,' and * never spoke of 
him with resentment. 't Junius's vengeance was di- 
rected against the party which included Lord Granby's 

* Barker's Letters, Pref. p. xxiv. 
\ Junius, Letter vii, note at the end. 



xlviii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

friends and coadjutors, rather than against the noble 
lord himself. 

If style and manner were not mere matters of taste, 
about which there is no disputing, we should further 
express our settled opinion, that there is no less weight 
in the argument founded on the supposed difference of 
style, in the Letters of Junius, and the known writings 
of Lord Sackville ; for, as is observed by the Editor of 
Woodfall's Junius, ' if we examine into his Lordship's 
style, we shall meet with facts not much less hostile ' 
to the claim. ' Of his own composition he thus 
speaks in a letter published shortly after his return 
from Germany, drawn up in justification of his conduct 
at the battle of Minden : " I had rather upon this oc- 
casion submit myself to all the inconveniences that 
may arise from the want of style, than borrow assist- 
ance from the pen of others, as I have no hopes of es- 
tablishing my character but from the force of truth." ' * 
And, in proof that he had not spoken ' with an undue 
degree of self-modesty,' the editor has subjoined a let- 
ter of his Lordship which abundantly supports that 
opinion. t 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol. i, p. 161. 

t We insert this letter, as published in Woodfall's Junius at 
the end of the Preliminary Essay : 

' Minden, Aug. 2, 1759. 

* Dear Sir, — The orders of yesterday, you may believe, 
affect me very sensibly. His Serene Highness has been 
pleased to judge, condemn, and censure me, without hearing 
me, in the most cruel and unprecedented manner ; as he never 
asked me a single question in explanation of anything he might 
disapprove ; and as he must have formed his opinion upon the 
report of others, it was still harder he would not give me an 
opportunity of first speaking to him upon the subject ; but you 
know, even in more trifling matters, that hard blows are some- 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xHx 

In further corroboration of this, it is certainly a strik- 
ing fact, that Lord Sackville's defence before the court 
martial was, as Mr Cumberland states, written for him 
by Dr Shebbeare. Could the lofty spirit of Junius, we 
may ask, stoop to * borrow assistance' from the pen of 
Dr Shebbeare ? 

Another circumstance, which has been often men- 
tioned in this controversy, appears to us to have more 

times unexpectedly given. If any body has a right to say that 
I hesitated in obeying orders, it is you. I will relate what I 
know of that, and then appeal to you for the truth of it. 

* When you brought me orders to advance with the British 
cavalry, T was near the village of Halen, I think it is called, I 
mean that place, which the Saxons burnt. I was there advanc- 
ed by M. Malhorte's order, and no further, when you came to 
me. Ligonier followed almost instantly ; he said, the whole 
cavalry was to advance. I was puzzled what to do, and begged 
the favor of you to carry me to the Duke, that I might ask an 
explanation of his orders. But that no time might be lost, I 
sent Smith with orders to bring on the British cavalry, as they 
had a wood before they could advance as you directed ; and I 
reckoned, by the time T had seen his Serene Highness,! should 
find them forming beyond the wood. — This proceeding of 
mine might possibly be wrong; but I am sure the service 
could not suffer, as no delay was occasioned by it. — The Duke 
then ordered me to leave some squadrons upon the right, 
which I did, and to advance the rest to support the infantry. 
This I declare I did, as fast as I imagined it was right in caval- 
ry to march in line. — I once halted by Lord Granby to com- 
plete my forming the whole. U pon his advancing the left before 
the right 1 again sent to him to stop : — He said, as the Prince 
had ordered to advance, he thought we should move forward. — 
I then let him proceed at the rate he liked, and kept my right 
»p with him as regularly as I could, till we got to the rear of 
tlie infantry and our batteries. — We both halted together, and 
afterwards received no order, till that which was brought by 
Col. Web and the Duke of Richmond, to extend in one line to 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 



weight than some writers have been willing to allow to 
it ; we mean the well-known and fine-edged sarcasm on 
the courage of Lord Sackville — ' I believe (says Ju- 
nius), the best thing I can do will be to consult with 
my Lord George Sackville. His character is known 
and respected in Ireland as much as it is here ; and I 
know he loves to be stationed in the rear, as well as 
myself — a remark which no officer would be likely 
to make of himself, after he had been publicly pointed 

the morass. — It was accordingly executed ; and then, instead 
of finding the enemy's cavalry to charge, as I expected, the 
battle was declared to be gained, and we were told to dismount 
our men. 

' This, I protest, is all I know of the matter, and I was never 
so surprised, as when I heard the Prince was dissatisfied that 
the cavalry did not move sooner up to the infantry. — It is not 
my business to ask, what the disposition originally was, or to 
find fault with anything. — All I insist upon is, that I obeyed 
the orders I received, as punctually as I was able ; and if it 
was to do over again, I do not think I would have executed 
them ten minutes sooner than I did, now I know the ground, 
and what was expected ; but, indeed, we were above an hour 
too late, if it was the Duke's intention to have made the caval- 
ry pass before our infantry and artillery, and charge the ene- 
my's line. — I cannot think that was his meaning, as all the or- 
ders ran to sustain our infantrj'^ : — and it appears, that both 
Lord Granby and I understood we were at our posts, by our 
halting, when we got to the rear of our foot. 

' I hope I have stated impartially the part of this transaction 
that comes within your knowledge. — If I have, I must beg 
you would declare it, so as I may make use of it in your ab- 
sence : for it is impossible to sit silent under such repioach, 
when I am conscious of having done the best that wr: ^ n my 
power. — For God's sake, let me see you, before yo. o to 
England, 

' I am, my dear Sir, 

' Your faithful humble servant, 

' Gkorge Sat, i.' 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. H 

at, and formally convicted by a Court Martial, as a 
coward.* 

In attaching so much weight to this circumstance, 
we are aware that we differ in some degree from a very 
high authority — we mean Mr Butler, who observes, 
that this anecdote may be thought a strong, but it evi- 
dently is not a decisive argument ; particularly if we 
suppose, what certainly is not impossible, that Lord 
George had upon this subject all the pride of conscious 
innocence.' t This learned writer adds — ' it must 
also be observed, that it is by conjecture only that the 
jeu d'esprit, in which this expression is found, is im- 
puted to Junius.' 

In reply to these remarks of this learned author, we 
think it may be fairly urged, that although a soldier 
who felt the consciousness of innocence, might, if ne- 
cessary in a serious discussion, allude to a circum- 
stance which all his readers would look upon as dis- 
graceful, yet it would not be natural for him to make 
it the subject of a jest in any case. And, as to the 
authenticity of the anecdote, it is to be observed, that 
Mr Woodfall has published it upon the same authority 
with the Blisccllaneous and other Letters, included in 
his edition of Junius ; and if we repudiate the one, we 
cannot acknowledge the other.J 

Mr Butler, however, adds a reflection of a more gen- 
eral nature, which deserves attention — * To the Re- 
n]iniscent,' says he, ' it appears more difficult to recon- 
cile liQrd George's authorship of Junius with that 

* " ^5Hett's History of England, vol. v, p. 275, chap. 13, 
sectior " and Trial of Lord George Sackville. 
t ' v's Reminiscences, vol.i, p. 91. 

X \Vi- ill's Junius, vol. i, p. 37. note. 

■ij.., lYir:;,' 



Hi INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

writer's advances to Mr Wilkes, or his intromission of 
himself into city politics, or the importance which he 
appears to have attached to them. The high aristoc- 
racy of the Whigs was, at that time, just beginning to 
thaw ; but the Reminiscent recollects, that Lord George 
was considered to be eminently aristocratic ; it is diffi- 
cult to think he would have run, as Junius did, into 
the city, or considered it to be of the importance which 
Junius thought it, that one man or another should be 
the lord mayor.' * 

As a circumstance of some weight, though certainly 
not decisive, it may be farther added, that Lord George 
Sackville did, by implication, substantially deny the 
authorship ; observing to a friend — * I should be proud 
to be capable of writing as Junius has done ; but there 
are many passages in his letters I should have been 
sorry to have written.' t It is true, as Dr Good ob- 
serves, that such a declaration is too general * to be in 
any way conclusive.' But it may be replied, that it is 
corroborated in some degree by the anecdote before 
alluded to, which is related of Lord Sackville [Ger- 
main], by Mr Cumberland, who was his secretary, and 
who says — *I never heard, that my friend. Lord 
George Germain, was amongst the supposed authors, 
till, by loay of jest, he told me so not many days before 
his death. I did not want him to disavow it, for there 
could be no occasion to disprove an absolute impossi- 
bility. The man who wrote it had a savage heart; for 
some of his attacks are execrable ; he was a hypocrite, 
for he disavows private motives, and makes pretension! 
to a patriotic spirit.' 

* Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i, p. 91. 

\ Wocdlall's Junius, vol. i, p. 161, citing Chalmer'a Appen- 
dix, p. 7. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Hu 

The conclusion of our American advocate of Lord 
Sackville's claims, that Junius had been a soldier, can- 
not be drawn with certainty from his occasional use of 
military phrases and illustrations. This argument, it 
will be perceived, belongs to the class of those which 
are said by logicians to prove too much. An indus- 
trious correspondent of Mr Barker's has made a collec- 
tion of the chief images and illustrations in the Letters 
of Junius, from which statement, however singular it 
may appear, we should have stronger reason for infer- 
ring that Junius had been a physician than a soldier. 
He informs us, that of those images and illustrations 
there are, from the military art, seven ; from the medical 
science, tioelve; from the terms of commerce, six, &lc. 

After a careful, and, we believe, an impartial review 
of all the circumstances urged in support of the claim 
of Lord SackviJle, some of which will be more parti- 
cularly adverted to hereafter, we have found it impossi- 
ble to bring our mind to the conclusion, that he was 
the author of Junius's Letters ; and we have felt no 
little surprise, that the editor of Woodfall's Junius 
should attach so much weight to the facts urged in sup- 
port of the claim, as to consider the evidence ' to be 
somewhat indecisive even to the present hour [1814].' * 

16. John Home Tooke, known in the Correspond- 
ence of Junius, as the Rev. John Home. This extra- 
ordinary man was named many years ago among the 
suspected authors of Junius's Letters ; t and this opin- 
ion has been lately again brought forward and support- 
ed with ability in an elaborate volume of more than 

* Preliminary Essay, vol. i, p. 160. 

t See the Monthly Review, for 1789, vol. Ixxxi, p. 465, and 
other English periodicals, &c. 



liv INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

four hundred pages, octavo, published at New York, in 
July, 1829, under the title of ' The Posthumous Works 
of Junius,' and dedicated by the author, ' J. F.' (who, 
in conformity with the plan of his volume, styles him- 
self * The Compiler ' ) to Sir Francis Burdett. 

The author of that volume observes — ' In regard to 
the mysterious and long-sought author of Junius, the 
compiler of this work, like many before him, is confi- 
dent that he has fixed upon the right man.' * We are, 
however, obliged to say, that after an attentive consid- 
eration of his arguments, we find several difficulties 
which do not admit of solution upon this hypothesis. 
But it is not our intention here to go into a critical ex- 
amination of it ; as the grounds of argument against it 
are for the most part, such as would be an anticipation 
of much that is contained in the following letters in 
xelation to the claims of Lord Temple. A few 
general remarks, however, may be properly submitted 
to the reader in this place. 

1. It seems to us impossible, that an individual situ- 
ated both politically and personally, as Mr Tooke was, 
at that period, could have had the means of knowing 
so promptly and accurately, as Junius did, the intended 
measures of the British cabinet, from time to time. 
2. We do not perceive any adequate cause assigned, 
why the opinions and feelings of Mr Tooke in regard to 
Lord Chatham should have undergone that entire 
change which those of Junius did. 3. The decla- 
ration of the present Lord Grenville, quoted by the 
author, p. 4'2l, that ' he (Junius) is not any of the per- 
sons suspected,' is at variance with the supposition of 
Mr Tooke's authorship ; for Mr Tooke had been too 

* Preface, p. i. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Iv 

often spoken of, as the writer of Junius, to have been 
overlooked by Lord Grenville on the occasion when his 
remark was made. 4. The age of Mr Tooke, as stated 
by the * Posthumous Works,' is irreconcilable with the 
the supposition ; for, it is assumed, and upon solid 
grounds, by all the writers on this question, that Ju-- 
nius must have been a man of fifty years old at least, 
at the date of his first letter, January 21, 1769; 
which would have made him ninetythree years of age 
in 1812, the time of Mr Tooke's death ; but Mr Tooke 
was only in his seventy seventh year when he died. 
If we go back to the still earlier period when Junius 
wrote under other signatures, it will be found that Mr 
Tooke was only thirtyone years old ; an age, at which his 
studies and habits of life were wholly inconsistent with the 
attainment of that extensive and solid political knowl- 
edge and experience, which Junius indisputably pos- 
sessed. 5. This hypothesis also renders it necessary, that 
the angry letters which passed between Junius and Mr 
Tooke, and the sarcasms thrown out by the former 
against the latter, on various occasions, were all a mere 
stratagem, to mislead the public in respect to the author. 
This supposition, we confess, appears to us violent, and 
not in keeping with the rest of the transaction. It has, we 
know, been also resorted to, by writers, who adopt the hy- 
pothesis of Lord Chatham's authorship ; and, it is obvious- 
ly impossible to maintain such an hypothesis in either of 
these cases, without making that assumption. Now, 
after making all just allowances for the petty stratagems 
which would be natural in secret warfare, we confess, 
that we cannot treat the severe collisions between Junius 
and those two aide adversaries, as mere artifices, played 
off before the public, tlic better to conceal the authors. 



Ivi INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

Independently of the circumstances in which Lord 
Chatham and Mr Tooke were placed, we have ever 
thought, from the letters alone, that the attacks of 
Junius upon those two conspicuous characters, resem- 
bled more the unconcealed hostility of a real enemy 
than war in disguise. 

This advocate of Mr Tooke's claim has a strong 
suspicion, that Dr Good, and Mr G. Wood fall (son of 
the original publisher), were in possesion of the name of 
the author ; in which he may very possibly be right ; we 
have sometimes entertained the same suspicion. But 
when this respectable writer goes so far as to infer, first, 
that Woodfall's use of the term ' Political Works ' of 
Junius, evidently implies, that he had written other 
works, and then in the next place, that those other 
works were, no doubt, the ' Epea Pteroenta' of Tooke, 
we are not able to follow him to his conclusion.* That 
Mr Tooke kneiv who Junius was, as he is said to have 
stated to Dr Graham and Mr Stephens, and that he 
considered Junius to be his ' best friend,' may be true.t 
But, with our author, we hesitate to infer from this 
'equivocal' declaration, that Mr Tooke meant himself 
by that expression. 

17. Walpole, Horace. This celebrated man has 
been considered by some writers to have claims to the 
authorship of Junius. But they have never been urged 
in such a manner, as to require particular notice on the 
present occasion. Mr George Coventry, in a letter to 
Mr Barker, dated March 11, 18:27, makes the follow- 
ing statement on the subject : ' As Woodfall, in his 
last edition, does not mention Horace Walpole, and at 

*The Posthumous Works of Junius, p. 17, 18. 
f Ibid, 290. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ivii 

the time my manuscript was going to press, an able 
Essay arrived from Sir C. Grey in India, in favor of 
Walpole's claims, I considered myself bound to refute 
them, which I have satisfactorily done. This so con- 
vinced the Marquis of Lansdowne and others who 
had charge of the MS., that they abandoned the pub- 
lication.' 

18. WilJirs, John. This extraordinary individual 
was very early suspected of having written the Letters 
of Junius. We have observed that suspicions of this 
kind were noticed in English journals, as long ago as the 
year 1774,* and doubtless existed before that time. But, 
besides the evidence of circumstances to the contrary, 
Mr Butler, who was on the nrost intimate terms with 
him, makes the following statement : * Far from giving 
the least hint that he [Wilkes] was the author of Ju- 
nius's Letters, he always explicitly disclaimed it, and 
treated it as a ridiculous supposition. No one, ac- 
quainted with his style, can suspect for a moment, that 
he was the author of them ; the merit of his style was 
simplicity; he had both gaiety and strength, but to the 
rancorous sarcasm, the lofty contempt Vvith which Ju- 
nius's Letters abound, no one uas a greater stranger 
than Mr Wilkes. To this may be added, the very 
slighting manner in which Junius expresses himself 
of Mr Wilkes. I am willing to admit, that if Mr 
Wilkes had v/ritten Junius's Letters, he would have 
treated Mr Wilkes uncivilly for the sake of disguising 
himself But sneer, and particularly that kind of 
sneer, which Mr Wilkes occasionally receives from 
Junius, you may be assured Mr W^ilkes would never 

* See Monthly Review, vol. xlii, p. G-5. 

/ 



Iviii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

have used in speaking of himself.' Mr Butler further 
states, that his conversations with Mr Wilkes on this 
subject took place between the years 1776 and 1784 ; 
and that one of their amusements was an attempt to 
discover the author of Junius's Letters. With this 
view, he observes, ' they considered them with great 
attention, examined many of the originals, collected 
and sifted all the anecdotes which they could learn, 
and weighed all the opinions and conjectures which 
they could hear of.'* 

He adds, that Mr Wilkes received many letters from 
Junius, which were never published ; one in particular 
on the subject of improving the representation of the 
people. Their opinions toere different. I remember 
Junius's letter began by saying — he was * treated as a 
pagan idol, with much incense, but with no attention 
to his oracles.' 

Dr Good also is clearly of opinion that Mr Wilkes 
was not Junius ; which, he says, must be apparent to 
every one who will merely give a glance at either the 
public or private letters. Wilkes could not have 
abused himself in the manner he is occasionally abus- 
ed in the former ; nor would he have said in the latter 
(since there was no necessity for his so saying) — ' T 
have been out of town for three weeks ' — at a time 
when he was closely confined in the King's Bench. 
The private letter here alluded to is dated Nov. 8, 
17G9 ; Wilkes entered the King's Bench prison April 
27, 1768, and was liberated April 18, 1770.'t 

Mr Wilkes and Mr Butler thought Junius's ' high 
wrought panegyric of Lord Chatham was ironical.' But 

* Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i, pp. 67, 68, American edition. 
t Woodfall's Junius, Preliminary Essay, vol.i, p. 133. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Hx 

upon the hypothesis maintamed in the following letters — 
that Lord Temple was Junius — this is satisfactorily and 
naturally accounted for, by the history of the difference 
and subsequent reconciliation between that noble lord 
and Lord Chatham, who was his brothei-in-law. 

With a view to this hypothesis, also, the relation in 
which Lord Temple and Mr Wilkes stood to each other 
demands a brief consideration. 

It is observed in the passage above quoted from Dr 
Good, that Wilkes could not have abused himself in the 
manner he is occasionally abused by Junius ; and Mr 
Butler, as we have seen, though he admits that Wilkes, 

Junius, might have treated himself uncivilly in order 
to keep up the disguise, yet thinks, that he would not have 
used the peculiar sneer at himself which he receives 
from Junius. Mr G. Coventry also, in a letter of March 
11, 1827, quoted by Mr Barker, assumes it to be a fact 
* well known, that no two persons could live on more 
hostile terms than Mr Wilkes and Lord Temple.' * 

This last statement, we confess, has much surprised 
us. That Lord Temple might have some objection to ap- 
pearing constantly before the public as the particular 
friend of Mr Wilkes, through the whole of his extraor- 
dinary career, we can conceive. But if the statement 
just quoted means, that they were not, generally speak- 
ing, on terms of friendly intimacy, it is contradicted by 
their whole private history. Mr Wilkes was a near 
neighbor of Lord Temple, in the country, and they 
appear to have had a good deal of intercourse with each 
other. Mr Wilkes constantly speaks of Lord Temple 
as his friend ; and it is familiar to every reader of Eng- 
lish history, that Lord Temple acted the part of a firm 
friend towards him on various occasions ; as, particular- 

* Barker's Letters, p. 2-51. 



Ix INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

ly, in the case of Wilkes's arrest and commitment to 
the Tower for publishing the celebrated Number Forty 
Five of the North Briton. Immediately upon his com- 
mitment, Lord Temple called to see him, but was re- 
fused admittance. Lord Temple himself went to the 
Court of Common Pleas, in order to obtain the writ of 
habeas corpus, under which Wilkes was finally discharg- 
ed — and, when he was directed to dismiss Mr Wilkes 
from his command as colonel of the militia of Bucking- 
hamshire, he expressed so much interest for him, in the 
letter of dismissal, that he was himself immediately 
removed from his office of Lord Lieutenant of the 
county. It was with the aid of Lord Temple's talents 
and money also, that Mr Wilkes defended himself a- 
gainst all the power and influence of the members of 
the administration, and was enabled to institute and 
successfully terminate the prosecutions against the Sec- 
retaries of State and the under officers of government. 
Now, after making all just allowcinces for motives of a 
public nature, we cannot doubt tliat leelings of personal 
regard also entered into the motives of Lord Temple. 

The same feelings towards Mr Wilkes are expressed 
by Junius. When about publishing an edition of his 
Letters, he requests Woodfall, in a manner which indi- 
cates that he had some friendly claims on Mr Wilkes, 
to ' shew the Dedication and Preface to Mr Wilkes ; ' 
and adds, ' if he has any material objection, let me 
know.' * And in a letter to Wilkes, dated September 
7, 1771, he says, with emphasis, and probably in allu- 
sion to the transactions abovementioned as well as 
others — ' I have served Mr Wilkes, and am still capa- 
ble of serving him.' f 

** Private Letter to Woodfall, No. 40. 
t Private Letters, No. C6, near the close. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 



Ixi 



On the subject of Wilkes's election, we subjoin a 
curious anecdote, for which we are indebted to an ob- 
liging friend, and which shews the strong interest taken 
in his success by Lord Temple, 

* The expulsion of John Wilkes from the House of 
Commons, in 1769, was brought forward purely to 
gratify the resentment of the interior cabinet against 
that gentleman. John Wilkes had no virtues that en- 
titled him to the esteem of his country, but he was a 
persecuted man. The generous character of English- 
men led them to partake with a man persecuted by 
power ; he became popular because the court had op- 
pressed him. It may not be improper to mention here, 
a little anecdote, which I received from the late Mr 
Sergeant Glynn, the confidential friend and law adviser 
of John Wilkes. Earl Temple had furnished Mr 
Wilkes with a qualification to enable him to stand for 
Middlesex ; but Mr Wilk*es was at that time under a 
sentence of outlawry for a misdemeanor, viz. for a libel 
published in the North Briton, No. 45. It was a mat- 
ter of uncertainty whether this judgment of outlawry 
could be reversed by a writ of error ; and, if the judg- 
ment of outlawry were not reversed, the freehold estate 
of .£600 a year, which Earl Temple had granted to Mr 
Wilkes for his life, would have been forfeited. Earl 
Temple would not expose himself to this risk ; it was 
therefore arranged, that if Mr Wilkes should be called 
on at the poll, to produce his qualification, he should 
immediately decline the poll ; but Mr Wilkes was not 
called on. I mention this anecdote, to show, how of- 
ten important events depend on little circumstances. If 
Mr Wilkes had not been elected for Middlesex, his ex- 
pulsion, and all the consequent questions, could never 



Ixii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

have taken place. But the most important consequence 
resuking from this persecution was, that it appeared 
that there was no measure so humilitating to those who 
supported it, but that a majority of the House of Com- 
mons might be brought to vote for it. It was seen that 
this House of Commons, elected under the auspi- 
ces of the Duke of Grafton, in 1768, was perfectly well 
suited to adopt every measure proposed by the interior 
Cabinet.' * 

We have dwelt the longer upon the relation subsist- 
ing between Lord Temple and Mr Wilkes, because a 
correct view of it, is of some importance in respect to 
the question discussed in the following Letters, and be- 
cause we think erroneous opinions have been adopted 
by some writers on this subject. The personal char- 
acter of Mr Wilkes, with all its faults — which cer- 
tainly cast a shade over his life — was such as brought 
him into the immediate society of the distinguished men, 
whose eminent talents and influence made them the 
leaders of the liberal or whig party of that period. He 
was himself a man of no ordinary talents. Mr But- 
ler who knew him intimately, characterises him, pos- 
sibly with some degree of partiality, as * a delightful 
and instructive companion, but too often offensive 
by his freedom of speech when religion or the sex was 
mentioned.' He adds, that his acquaintance with 
Mr Wilkes ' did not begin till his political turmoils 
were at an end. In his manners and habits he was an 
elegant epicurean, yet it was evident to all his inti- 
mates, that he feared 

* Manes aliquos et subterranea regna. Juvenal. 

* Recollections and Reflections on Personal and Political Affairs 
during the Reign of George III. By Jolin Nichols, Esq. p. 30, 
Amen'iin Ef*ition. 1622. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixiil 

In his real politics he was an aristocrat, and would 
much rather have been a favored courtier at Versailles 
than the most commanding orator in St Stephen's 
chapel. His distresses threw him into politics ; he as- 
sumed the character of a staunch Whig ; and all must 
admit his consistency .... Mr Wilkes abounded in 
anecdote ; wit was so constantly at his command, that 
wagers have been gained, that from the time he quitted 
his home near Story's Gate, till he reached Guildhall, 
no one would address him, who would leave him with- 
out a smile or a hearty laugh. Nothwithstanding their 
feuds, Lord Sandwich and he were partial to each other. 
On one occasion, the Reminiscent not having been 
punctual to an engagement which Lord Sandwich had 
made for him, it was (not good-naturedly) mentioned to 
his lordship, that the delinquent had dined with Mr 
Wilkes. * Well then,' said Lord Sandwich, ' Wilkes 
has so often made me break appointments with others, 
that it is but fair he should once make a person break 
his appointment with me.' * 

Mr Wilkes's parliamentary patron was Lord Temple, 
by whose influence he was chosen representative for 
Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire ; and he was in hopes, 
through the interest of his patron, to have obtained 
some place under government, which his embarrassed 
circumstances rendered highly desirable. But he was 
always disappointed in this, and used to ascribe his fail- 
ure to Lord Bute. He connected himself as a political wri- 
ter with Lord Temple, in 1762, defending him and Mr 
Pitt, and attacking the ministry. In the same year ho 
commenced the famous periodical work called the 
North Briton, in which he was assisted by Lord Tem- 

* Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i, p. C3-C6, Amer. edition. 



Ixiv INTRODUCTORY ESSAY, 

pie and Charles Churchill. This journal was estab- 
lished in order to counteract The Briton, which Sraol- 
let conducted in defence of Lord Bute's administration ; 
and the North Briton, it is supposed, contributed to 
drive Lord Bute to a resignation in 1763. The con- 
sequences of his prosecution for publishing the 45th 
No. of that work are well known, and have been already 
mentioned. The result was a complete triumph on the 
part of Wilkes against the whole strength of the gov- 
ernment ; by which he was emboldened, in defiance of 
the advice of his friends, to set up a press in his own 
house, and to reprint the North Briton. On a second 
persecution, he withdrew to France, and incurred the 
penalty of outlawry ; but this outlawry was afterwards 
reversed, as illegal. He was immediately elected mem- 
ber for Middlesex; and was again punished by fine and 
imprisonment for publishing two libels. In 1769, he 
was expelled from the House of Commons : he was 
immediately re-elected, but declared incapable of a seat 
during that parliament. He was now, as his biogra- 
phers relate, the martyr of liberty, and large sums of 
money were collected to pay his debts. He was again 
re-elected, and again refused a seat ; Colonel Luttrell, 
the Court candidate, whose votes were but about the 
fourth part of Mr Wilkes's, being declared to be elect- 
ed. But on the accession of the Rockingham admin- 
istration, he prevailed in a motion for rescinding the 
decision of the House of Commons, which gave Lut- 
trel his seat. This admission of Luttrell as a member, 
to the exclusion of Wilkes, caused loud complaints 
through the country, and only aided the popularity of 
the latter. He was successively chosen an alderman 
of London, sheriff of London and Middlesex, and lord 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. IXT 

mayor of London ; and finally in 1776, was re-elected 
member of parliament for Middlesex, and permitted to 
take his seat without opposition. At length, after hav- 
ing passed the active years of his life in the most 
stormy scenes of a most tumultuous period of British 
politics, and having been the means — whatever may 
have been his motives — of securing some permanent 
advantages to the cause of public and private liberty, 
his latter years passed off quietly and without much 
notice ; and, to use his own expression, of unrivalled 
felicity, he was ' an extinguished volcano.' 

These views of Mr Wilkes's character and his con- 
nexion with Lord Temple, lead us to add a few ob- 
servations in this place, more immediately relating to the 
latter ; whose claims to the authorship of Junius's Let- 
ters are the subject of the present work. As we do 
not wish to anticipate anything which the reader will 
find in the following pages, our remarks will be confin- 
ed, as far as possible, to certain points which require 
additional explanation. 

The character and talents of Lord Temple have 
probably been less conspicuous in the common histories 
which we have of English affairs — and most readers, 
even those who read for useful instruction, content 
themselves with those meagre and unsatisfactory works 
— in consequence of his having been called upon to 
act in public jointly with his brother-in-law, Mr 
Pitt, afterwards Lord Chatham, whose overwhelming 
talents threw all his friends as well as adversaries into 
the shade. That Lord Temple, however, was one 
of those, whose intellectual endowments entitle them to 
the rank of leading men, is undeniable. If the natural 
force of his talents was resisted and prevented from 



Ixvi 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 



being felt in the public councils, it was owing to the 
influence of those secret causes, against which mere 
intellectual power cannot of itself prevail — those causes, 
to which even the lofty mind of Lord Chatham was 
compelled to yield. Of Lord Temple's ability, however, 
there is the fullest evidence, both in the express decla- 
rations of Lord Chatham himself, and in the public 
measures in which Lord Temple's opinions had an in- 
fluence. We believe it will be found, as some of his 
friends have affirmed, that no small part of the fame 
w^hich Lord Chatham obtained by his foreign wars, was 
owing to the able plans and counsels of Lord Temple, 
then in the War Department. Lord Chatham accord- 
ingly placed the greatest reliance upon him ; and when 
the open diiference took place between them, in the 
year 1766 — which is particularly mentioned in the first 
part of the present Letters — Lord Chatham never 
ceased to lament the want of a friend, whom he after- 
wards publicly pronounced to be one of the greatest 
men that England had produced. He appears, however, 
to have had some traits of character, which too frequent- 
ly prevent superior talents from having their full influ- 
ence, both in public and private life. He is described 
by one of the biographers of Lord Chatham, as ' the 
blunt, the honest and artless Earl Temple ; ' * and an- 
other writer, Mr Almon, who was a confidential friend 
of his, says of him — 'the natural disposition of this 
noble Lord was the most amiable that can be conceived, 
to his friends ; but when offended, his disapprobation 
was warm and conspicuous ; his language flowed spon- 

*The History of the Life of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, 
Dublin, 1783, 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixvii 

taneously from his feelings ; his heart and voice always 
corresponded.'* 

For these reasons, as well as his being an efficient 
member of the Pitt or whig party, Lord Temple was a 
man who would not be in much request with the persons 
who composed the court party of his day. And even 
before the close of George the Second's reign, it appears 
by that curious and instructive book, the Diary of 
George Bubb Dodington (Lord Melcombe), that a 
settled plan was adopted for getting rid of him. As this 
work is not very common, we give a few extracts from it. 

' 1749, Oct. 15 — At Leicester House. The Gren- 
villes presented for the title of Temple. 

' 1752, Nov. 27 — King's Birth Day kept. Lord Hills- 
borough began a conversation with me. He thought 
there must be some disturbance arise from the Pitt par- 
ty ; that, though they were so well pleased, they were 
still uneasy ; that they neither liked others nor were lik- 
ed by them. I said I could not conceive that they 
would stir. He said, yes; for that Pitt's passion was 
ambition, not avarice — that he was at a full stop, as 
things were, and could have no hopes of going farther. 
He was once popular; and, if he could again make a 
disturbance, and get the country on his side, he then 
might have hopes; now, on the present system, he could 
have none. I replied, I thought they could not part 
with what they had, &c. &c. He said they had the 
Temple pocket — that, to his knowledge, they were all 
as one and would stand or fall with Pitt as their head. 
Lord Hillsborough wondered they did not break out; 
he daily expected it. 

* Almon's Anecdotes nf Lord Chatham, vol. ii. p. 29. 



Ixviii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

' 1755, Nov. 20 — Messrs Pitt, Legge, and George 
Grenville received letters of dismission, and James 
Grenville resigned the Board of Trade. 

' 1757, Feb. 18 — A motion for <£ 200,000, for an army 
of observation in Germany, agreed to without debate or 
division. Mr Tucker had agreed with Mr George 
Grenville to be paymaster of the Marines, and for George 
Grenville to be chosen in his place. The king sent to 
Fox, to know if he could 'prevent it, and if he thought I 
would interpose : Mr Fox said, he supposed, his Ma- 
jesty commanded me, I would. The king ordered Fox 
to speak to me — he did, and I stopt it. This is the 
Jirst step toivards turning out Lord Temple. 

'1757, March 7 — The Duke of Newcastle, who had 
resigned, would not move ; the king grew impatient to 
get rid of the ministry which he had imposed upon him- 
self, and threw himself upon Fox to form a new admin- 
istration. We agreed to begin ivith dismissing Lord 
Temple; I proposed Lord Hallifax for the Admiralty, 
the king consented to it, and I was to negotiate the af- 
fair with him.'* 

We cannot doubt, therefore, that Lord Temple had 
the talents, as he certainly had the motives, for writing 
Junius; all which will be more fully shown in the 
present work. It is true, that both intellectual power 
and motives also may be found in others; as, for exam- 
ple in Lord Chatham. Yet independently of the numer- 
ous facts wholly inconsistent with his being the author 

* Diary of the late George Bubb Dodington. Baron of Mel- 
combe Regis, from Marcli 8, 1749 to February 6, 1761 — 3d edit. 
London, 1785. Mr Butler, in his Reminiscences, characterises 
this record of political corruption as — ' the lamentable revela- 
tions ' of Lord Melcombe. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixix 

of Junius, there is some ground for the discrimination 
which is made between Junius and Lord Chatham, 
though expressed perhaps too strongly, in the follow- 
ing remarks : 

* In generous self-confidence, and in effusions of 
animated sentiment, the great Earl Chatham was cer- 
tainly not unequal to Junius. But he wanted the ex- 
tensive and profound knowledge of the author of these 
Letters ; and he had even less skill to unite the arts of 
insinuation with those of overbearing confidence and 
energy. Chatham does not appear to have usually rea- 
soned well in his speeches. Much of his eloquence 
was in his elocution ; much of it, in his intrepidity and 
disinterestedness, oratorical and political.'* 

' The claims of a particular individual,' says another 
writer on this question, * can be morally maintained 
only by the circumstance, that they are peculiar to that 
particular individual, inapplicable to all other claimants, 
and yet having an apparent connexion with Junius.' 
These conditions, to the extent in which they should 
be taken, will, as we think, be found to be fulfilled in 
the hypothesis adopted in the following Letters — that 
Lord Temple was Junius. 

The coincidences between different occurrences in 
the life of Lord Temple, and the tone and course adopted 
by Junius at different periods, as pointed out in the 
present work, are certainly very remarkable. When, 
for example, Lord Chatham and Lord Temple were 
openly at variance, in consequence of the attempt made 
by the former to exclude the latter from any participa- 
tion in forming a ministry (in the year 1766), Junius 
attacked Lord Chatham with as much severity as he 

* Heron's Junius, vol. i, page 51. 
g 



IXX INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

did any individual who fell under his displeasure. This 
temper continued till the autumn of 1768, when a re- 
conciliation took place between them ; immediately upon 
which, the tone of that writer began to change towards 
Lord Chatham, and at last rose to the highest strain of 
eulogy, in the memorable passage which is to be found 
in his 54th Letter, and is copied into the present vol- 
ume.* 

Another remarkable coincidence in the opinions of 
Junius and Lord Temple is, that both uniformly agreed 
in their politics, and on certain fundamental measures 
of domestic and foreign policy, with the well known 
English statesman, Mr George Grenville, the brother 
of the latter; as is justly observed by a writer before 
quoted ;t while, on the contrary Lord Chatham differed 
from them all in regard to some essential measures of 
government. I Indeed the uniform attachment of Ju- 

* See p. 187. Lord Chatham afterwards made him one of the 
executors of his will. 

t Page xiii, ante. 

t Among these measures was the American Stamp Act, 
which has generally been ascribed to Mr Grenville. But the 
following statement from Almon's Anecdotes, shows the uncer- 
tainty upon v/hich received historical facts often rest. ' It was 
in this session (1765) of Mr Grenville's Administration, that 
the American Stamp Act was passed; which Mr Grenville af- 
terwards defended with the warmest zeal and resolution ; yet, if 
we may believe Mr Jenkinson, now Lord Liverpool, who, in 
such a case may safely be taken for the best authority, this 
measure was not Mr Grenville's. See Mr Jenkinson's speech 
in the House of Commons, on the 15th May, 1777. His Lord- 
ship has not yet informed the nation, to whom this measure 
ought to have been ascribed ; though he has explicitly acquitted 
Mr Grenville of it.' P. 410, note. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixxi 

nius to Mr Grenville is one of the most remarkable cir- 
cumstances in his letters.* 

The familiarity of Junius with the affairs of the War 
Department, in all its details, has long been an obstacle, 
which the advocates of almost every candidate for the 
authorship have found it impossible to overcome ; and, 
this circumstance alone has, perhaps, more than any 
other, given the greater plausibility to the claims of Sir 
Philip Francis, who was, for a considerable time, an un- 
der officer in that department. But, when we know, 
as is fully explained in the following letters, that Lord 
Temple was a principal in that department, and was 
also for a time a lord of the Admiralty, this difficulty is 
satisfactorily explained. Junius avails himself of this 
familiarity with the War Department, particularly in his 
correspondence with Sir William Draper, and employs 
it with great effect to the entire discomfiture, and as 
we should think, extreme mortification of his adversary. 
But we find afterwards that Sir William forgave him; 
and the opinion of Sir William is certainly a strong tes- 
timonial in favor of the honesty of the motives of Junius. 

* On this point the Author of the present work adds one 
further remark, in addition to what is stated by him, respecting 
Junius's declaration that he did not personally know Mr Gren- 
ville : 

' On the subject of Junius's not being personally known to 
Mr Grenville, I would add one more remark to show, that if the 
writer is Lord Temple, that declaration is of no weight against 
the supposition. It is this ; in the Miscellaneous Letters of 
Junius, No. 100, signed Anti-Fox, he makes a remark as to 
his being unknoicn to himself, which is stronger than that re- 
specting his being unknown to Mr Grenville. »'' I know 

nothing of Junius, but I see plainly that he has designedly spar- 
ed Lord Holland and his family," &c. The black boy spoken 
of by Junius, in this Letter, is Charles Jamea Fox.' 



Ixxii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

It appears in the following anecdote : * Some months 
after the Letters of Junius were published collectively/ 
says Mr Campbell, ' Boyd met Sir W. Draper at the 
Tennis Court, where their acquaintance was originally 
formed in the year 1769, and where, being both great 
tennis players, they used often to meet. The conver- 
sation turning upon Junius, Sir William observed, that 
" though Junius had treated him with extreme severity, he 
now looked upon him as a very honest fellow ; that he 
freely forgave him for the bitterness of his censures, and 
that there was no man with whom he would more glad- 
ly drink a bottle of old Burgundy." '* 

We now pass on to some other considerations, con- 
nected with the investigation made in the following 
work. 

Among other things, we would, for a moment, ad- 
vert to the style of Junius, and its resemblance to the 
specimens of other publications, which there is no 
reason to doubt were, either in whole or in part, the 
productions of Lord Temple. 

The basis of the argument on this head, with the 
author of the present work, is a remarkable pam- 
phlet published in 1766, which contains a minute and 
curious account of the quarrel between Lord Temple 
and Lord Chatham. In calling this pamphlet Lord 
Temple's, however, the author of these Letters would 
not be understood as affirming, that every word of it 
was from his pen ; on the contrary, it contains many 
laudatory expressions, which he never would have ap- 
plied to himself It is sufficient for the purpose, that 

* Campbell's Life of Hugh Boyd, p. 185, as cited in Wood- 
fftU'g Junius, note to Lett. vii. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 



Ixxiii 



the substance of it was furnished by Lord Temple, as 
Almon informs us ; who also states, that it was written 
by Mr Humphrey Cotes, assisted by another person;* 
but who that other person was, and why he is not 
named, Mr Almon does not inform us. There can be 
no doubt, as the writer of these Letters supposes, that 
jt was Lord Temple himself 

The reader will find (p. 198), several parallel pas- 
sages from this pamphlet and from Junius, which per- 
haps will bs thought more strikingly similar in tone 
and manner of thinking, than even in language. To 
those examples, we add here a few others. 

The word dictation, which in the time of Junius was 
not in use, and probably was not to be found in any 
other English writer, in the sense of prescribing or re- 
quiring, occurs in his letters, and also in the Pamphlet 
just mentioned. t ' An affectation of prostrate humility 
in the closet, but a lordly dictation of terms to the people.' 
Junius' s Miscellaneous Letters, No. 1, April 28, 1767, 
cited p. 33 of the present work. * If Mr Pitt insisted up- 
on a superior dictation, dz>c.' Enquiry, see p. 251, post. 
In the Letters of Junius and in the Enquiry, the word 
dictator also, though in comm.on use among English 
writers, occurs at about the same period,, with a fre^ 
queilcy and in a manner which indicate the habitual 
action of one mind. 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. ii, p. 23, note. 

t Foi" an account of this extraordinary publication, entitled 
' An Enquiry into the Conduct of a late Right Honorable Com- 
moner,' see the following Letters, pp. 6, 8, 9, 212, &c. The 
whole pamphlet, except a few pages, makes the first article of tfje 
Appendix to the present volume. 



Ixxiv INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

Both Junius and Lord Temple make great use of the 
word disdain and its derivatives ; ' The principal nobil- 
ity who might disdain to submit to the upstart insolence 
of a dictator,' &,c. Miscellaneous Letters, l^o. 1, cited 
p. 36, post. — ' Who with a magnanimity almost pecu- 
liar to himself disdained to wear the chains, or put on the 
livery of such an incompetent statesman,' &lc. Enquiry ^ 
p. 242, post. — ' By an integrity that is now, and to the 
latest ages will be admired, in disdaining to put on the 
livery of the Favorite, or that of his Vice-Roy, the new 
made peer' [Chatham]. Enquiry, ip. 257, post. * He 
[the Duke of Grafton] then accepted of the Treasury up- 
on terms, which Lord Temple had disdained.' Miscella' 
neous Letters, No. 48, Oct. 19, 1768. — ' They disdained 
to set an example of deceit to the public ' &lc. Enquiry, 
p. 261, post. 

These writers also appear to have had a partiality for 
the verb to thunder. Two instances are noticed in the 
present work, p. 198, one from Junius's Miscellaneous 
Letters, No. 47, and one from the Enquiry, p. 240, post. 
Another example is- the following : ' Instead of the 
dignity of thundering out secrets of state from the 
gallery, we see the first Lord of the Admiralty skulking 
into the House just before a division,' &c. Junius's 
Letters, vol. 2, p. 346, American Edition. 

One example is given, p. 198, post, of this expression, 
used by the two writers — ' to widen and strengthen the 
bottom of his administration. Another, of similar im- 
port and nearly the same in words, may be here added : 
' His [Lord Temple's] wish was, to retrieve the honor 
of the nation by an administration formed upon a broad 
bottom,' &LC. Enquiry, p. 257, posts 

At p. 198, post, also is given a contemptuous descrip- 
tion of the ministry, from Junius (under the name of 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. IxXV 

Atticus ) and from the Enquiry — ' A ministry whose 
names were almost unknoicn till they appeared in the 
Gazette.' Enquiry, p. 253, post. An expression closely 
resembling this will be found in one of the Miscellane- 
ous Letters, published shortly after The Enquiry: 
* We knoio as little of the services they [the Ministers] 
have performed since it became their lot to appear in 
the Gazette, as we did of their persons or characters 
before.' Miscellaneous Letters, No. 3, signed Anti- 
Sejanus, Jr. 

We could make some additions to these parallel pas- 
sages, if it were necessary ; but, so far as particular 
expressions of the kind here given will serve to identify 
a writer, we think the instances produced are sufficient ; 
more especially, when we consider that some of them 
were rather uncommon, that they were used at about 
the same period of time in the different publications in 
question, and generally speaking, in relation to the 
same topics of discussion. 

An ingenious writer, before quoted, has with many 
others supposed, that the author of Junius must have 
been so conversant with either Ireland or Scotland, as, 
by force of habit, to have used some words in a pecul- 
iar manner, and diiferently from the English ; he gives, 
as one example, the verb to mean, employed by Junius 
tlius : * They who object to detached parts of Junius' 
letter, either do not mean him fairly, or have not con- 
sidered,' &LC. — ' I meant the cause and the public ; 
both are given up.' — * You are satisfied that I mean you 
well,' &-C.* This is not a common idiom at the pre- 
sent day ; but Mr Wilkes, who certainly wrote good 
English, makes use of the same expression — ' I am 

* Junius Unmasked, p. 11. 



IxXVi INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

satisfied that Junius now means me well^ &/C.* Other 
unusual phrases and words have been urged on this 
point, and even to prove that Junius must have been an 
Irishman by birth, or at least educated in Ireland. But 
this opinion is ably combated by Dr Good, in the Pre- 
liminary Essay to Woodfall's edition of the Letters. 
Perhaps greater weight was originally given to this 
suggestion than it deserved, because it was at a very 
early period declared by the party writers of the day, 
and probably for mere party purposes, that Junius was 
the production of Edmund Burke. If Junius was not 
an author by profession — as the difference of finish 
in his style at different periods, would seem to indicate 
— he might occasionally make slight deviations from 
the current idiom or established words used by the com- 
munity of authors and critics of his day, which would 
naturally attract observation.! A difference in his 
style ' after two years' practice ,' was observed many 
years ago, when only the Letters under the signature 
of Junius had been published. | But the difference be- 
tween those and the Miscellaneous Letters — which go 
back two or three years farther — is, in our judgment, 
more palpable. We would here be understood to speak 
of mere finishing or polish of style ; for in all his writ- 
ings, the earlier and the later, though not in all alike, 
we find the same vehemence and intensity — the same 

* Woodfall's Junius, Correspondence of Wilkes and Junius, 
Lett. 5, vol. i, p. 302. 

t In his Miscellaneous Letters, No. 96, for instance, he says 
of Mr Wedderburne — * his profession sets his principles at 
auction,' which, though it may be good English, was not the 
current language of business. 

t Monthly Review, vol. Ixxi, p. 368. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixxvii 

* thoughts that breathe, and words that burn,' which 
have given unfading celebrity to his composition. 

The able and discriminating writer in the Edinburgh 
Review, whom we have before quoted, passes the fol- 
lowing judgment on the style of Junius's Letters — that 
they ' must be allowed to be finished models, though 
not of the purest and highest sort of composition.'* 
Numerous particular criticisms on his style, and made 
generally with a more than common soundness of judg- 
ment, but bordering on severeness of taste, and per- 
haps sometimes hypercritical, are interspersed through- 
out the notes of the valuable edition of Junius, 
which was published at London in 1801, under the 
name of ' Robert Heron, Esq.,' and reprinted at Phila- 
delphia, in 1804. One of the general remarks of this 
Editor deserves attention ; — that the occasional use of 
such words, for example, as wherein, and some others 
which occur only * in our elder classical works, and in 
books of law,' indicate that ' the reading of Junius ' lay 
chiefly in such works, t In another place, the first 
paragraph of the 12th Letter, he justly condemns in the 
concluding sentence of that passage, ' two puns, of 
which one cannot approve, as consistent with delicate 
correctness of composition ; but which nevertheless pro- 
duce, as we here find them, no unhappy effect, and 
which might serve to excite the horse-laugh of the vul- 
gar part of Junius' readers.' ^ Another observation of 
this commentator, who appears to have formed his opin- 
ions according to the severest canons of taste, and is 
apparently of the older school, occurs in a note on the 

* Edinburgh Review, vol. xliv, p. 1 ; for June, 1826. 
t Heron's Junius, vol. i, p. 86, note. 
t Ibid, p. 126, note. 



IxXViii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

first Letter, where he criticises the use of the word j^wan- 
ces in Junius, as a term introduced from the French 
into the English language ' without necessity, among 
numberless other barbarisms of office.' But he at the 
same time observes, that this term * seems however, to be 
at last legitimated.' Yet those who cultivate delicate 
propriety of style, would do well to be sparing in the 
use of it.'* 

* Ibid, p. 28. We have been at a loss to know the origin of 
this valuable edition of Junius, which passes under the name of 
^E-obert Heron.' The circumstance which first excited our 
attention was, that we could find no account of it in the Eng- 
lish Reviews ; and a friend, who has by our request made a more 
particular search, has been equally unsuccessful. In the jour- 
nals of literature and bibliographies, we find, under the name 
of Robert Heron, a well known writer in other departments 
of knowledge, an account of numerous original works and 
editions of authors, but no mention of an edition of Junius by 
any editor of that name. A friend particularly conversant with 
British literary history has mentioned to us the fact, that Mr 
John Pinkerton published two works under the name of Robert 
Heron-, and this circumstance is mentioned in Watts'' Bibliotheca 
Britannica ; but neither of these was Junius. The JVotcs of He- 
ron, whoever he was, contain a fund of accurate and minute 
historical information ; and this is often given in a tone and man- 
ner indicating a familiarity with public measures and their 
causes, and the motives to them, which would seem to 
be derived either from personal observation, or from in- 
tercourse with the actors in them. Some circumstances 
also would seem to afford ground for supposing, that this editor 
knew more about ihe author of Junius, than he communicates. 
Was it, for instance, by an accident, that he placed the portrait 
of Lord Temple as a frontispiece to his edition, and yet (as 
Woodfall also did in his edition), left out his name from the in- 
dexes to each of his volumes ; while, at the same time, he fre- 
quently speaks of him in his Notes, and generally in terms of 
commendation ? The name of Grenville is also omitted in his 
indexes. The style of the Notes is finished with care, and is 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixxix 

The celebrated critique upon Junius by Dr Johnson 
— who however wrote as a partizan, matched against 
Junius by the ministry — although it was drawn up 
under the restraints of strong political prejudices, and 
in qualified and cautious language, must, so far as re- 
spects the ability and style of his adversary, be consid- 
ered as strong testimony of the critic himself, and as 
indicating also the judgment of the public, in favor of 
the extraordinary force of talents and style displa3;ed by 
Junius. He says — ' It is not by his liveliness of im- 
agery, his pungency of periods, or his fertility of allu- 
sions, that he detains the cits of London and the boors 
of Middlesex. Of style and sentiment, they take 
no cognizance . . . The supporters of the Bill of Rights 
feel no niceties of composition .... Though I cannot 
think the style of Junius secure from criticism, though 
his expressions are often trite and his periods feeble, 
I should never have stationed him where he has placed 
himself, had I not rated him by his morals rather than 
his faculties.'* 

Upon the whole, when we compare the decisions of 
the most eminent critics, and make all just allowances for 
the bias of political or other feeling, we shall probably 

often stiff from academic exactness; as, for example, where he 
says, Sir William Draper ' seems to have sitten down to write.' 
P. 45. We cannot help forming- conjectures as to the real edi- 
torship in this case ; but they are not such as would be entitled 
to attention, and are, perhaps, unfounded. 

* We have thought this remarkable critique of Dr Johnson 
would be a proper addition to the present volume, as it was con- 
sidered to be to Woodfall's edition of Junius ; from the notes of 
of which we copy it. The reader will find it in our Appendix, 
No. V. But we are not to be understood as adopting all the 
opinions contained in it. 



IXXX INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

find the result of the concurring opinions of those, who 
estimate the composition of Junius by a rigorous stand- 
ard of taste, to correspond very nearly with the judgment 
passed upon it in Heron's work — that if we except ' an 
occasional excess of epigrammatic turns, a structure of 
sentences sometimes labored to harshness and almost 
to obscurity, with a few incongruities of metaphor, 
these Letters must be owned to be, in all other re- 
spects, probably the most vigorous and faultless speci- 
men of human eloquence that the world has yet seen.' 



Since this work was put to press, the following arti- 
cle, respecting another candidate for the authorship of 
Junius, has appeared in the Gentleman's Magazine, 
for February, 1831. 

* Gray's Inn, February/ 4. 
* Mr Urban, — 

* Your correspondent, Mr Barker, in your last Sup- 
plement, page 579, has misnamed Mr McLean, whose 
Christian name was Laughlin, not Lachlin. Accord- 
ing to my recollection of his handwriting, it bore no 
resemblance to that of Junius, as given in the fac-simile 
copies published by Mr George Wood fall. McLean 
was a man of talent, but I have no conception of his 
having been able to write the Letters of Junius. That 
he was connected with Lord Shelburne there is no 
doubt. It is not likely, therefore, that he should have 
written against his Lordship ; but Junius, in some of 
his Letters, has spoken contemptuously of that noble- 
man, who was never held in much esteem as a political 
character, and was long known by the nick-name of 
Malagrida. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixxxi 

' It is said in the Letter quoted by Mr Barker, that 
whenever Junius mentions Lord Temple's brother-in- 
law, Lord Chatham, it is evidently with great caution 
and hesitancy. Now surely the writer could not have 
seen the early Letters of Junius, under other signatures, 
in which Lord Chatham is grossly abused for his sup- 
port of the American Colonists (whom Junius consid- 
ered as rebels), and for his Lordship's opposition to the 
Stamp Act. Junius even goes so far, as to treat Lord 
Chatham as a lunatic, nor is he much more civil to 
Lord Camden. 

' Junius, beyond all question, was a decided Grenville- 
ite ; and I am thoroughly persuaded he was known to the 
Grenville family. Indeed, I have heard, on very good 
authority, that the law citations, contained in one of Ju- 
nius's Letters to Lord Mansfield, were furnished by 
Counsellor Darell, and were sent by him from Stowe 
to Mr Woodfall, the printer of the Public Advertiser ; 
ajid yet I have never heard that any such animosity ex- 
isted between the Grenvilles and Lord Mansfield, as 
could warrant their giving countenance to the severe 
and inhuman attacks made by Junius on the latter great 
man. 

' I cannot agree with Mr Barker's correspondent, 
that the French revolution grew out of the principles 
of Junius ; but I think it sprung in a great measure 
from the resistance of the Americans, to whom, as I 
have already signified, Junius was fiercely inimical.' 

The preceding extract, though published at London 

in February, before the present work was put to press, 

was not received by the author of these Letters, till 

afterwards, in the month of April last. In a commu- 

h 



Ixxxii 



[NTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 



nication of April 13, he makes the following remark 
upon it : 

' The last Supplement here spoken of has not 
come to hand ; but, I presume, the article alluded 
to by this writer, related to Mr Swinden's pamphlet, 
supporting the claims of Lord Chatham. The writer 
thinks it beyond question, that Junius was a Gren- 
ville-ite ; but he cannot account, or never heard of 
such animosity existing between the Grenvilles and 
Lord Mansfield, as could warrant their giving counte- 
nance to the inhuman attacks made by Junius on Lord 
Mansfield. I think this has been satisfactorily account- 
ed for in the course of my investigation.' 

The handwriting of Junius's Letters is here al- 
luded to by this English writer. The author of the 
present work has purposely avoided this ground of ar- 
gument ; believing, that he had ample proof without it, 
and that it was in itself the least to be relied upon. It 
is, however, occasionally mentioned in the course of the 
notes to his letters ; as at pages 128 and 141 ; in which 
last place a curious fact is stated, which, so far as it is 
of any weight, may be said to confirm the hypothesis 
of Lord Temple's authorship ; that is, that Mr Wilkes 
and Mr Butler thought the handwriting of Junius's 
Letters resembled that of a card of invitation which 
the former had from ' old Lady Temple, written in her 
own hand.' Junius also says to Woodfall, ' I would 
avoid having this hand too commonly seen ; ' a hint, 
which shows it to have been a natural hand, and not, 
as some have supposed, a feigned one. 

A remark or two further, upon what may properly be 
considered the mere minutiae of this question, will be 
here added. 



INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. IxXXiii 

One of tlie writers in favor of Lord Chatham, Mr 
Swinden, imagines that the signature C, affixed to seve- 
ral of the Private Letters, might be significant, and mean 
Chatham. An adversary of Lord Chatham would, 
we think, be more likely to take this disguise. But, 
apart from the indiscretion of the author's adopting a 
letter of his own name, the letter C was the initial of va- 
rious signatures adopted by Junius. It may possibly de- 
serve inquiry, whether the signature affixed to the Pam- 
phlet of 1766, called Lord Temple's pamphlet, is signi- 
ficant — ' N. C. M. S. C The same signature is affix- 
ed to several pieces in verse (called in the book itself, 
' excellent pieces of poetry ' ! ) accompanying an im- 
portant contemporary publication entitled ' The His- 
tory of the Minority, during the years 1762, 1763, 
1764, and 1765 ; ' of which we have the fourth edi- 
tion, London, 1765, now before us. This publication, 
in its tone and course of reflections upon particular 
topics, and occasionally in its language, bears a strong 
resemblance to Lord Temple's Pamphlet ; and he pro- 
bably had some agency in it. We may add, that it 
states numerous facts, which show the intense interest 
and zeal of Lord Temple in the cause of Mr Wilkes 
and of civil liberty, in defence of which, he stood forth 
'with bis person as well as his^>M7se.' Three of the above 
letters are initials of Junius's early signatures ; the other, 
N, does not occur among those names. We add but 
one more remark on this head. Among the Latin 
lines, which the printer of the Public Advertiser used 
to throw out as ' signals ' to Junius, is the following — 

De TE fabula nanatur ; — 

where the letters TE, which happen to be the initials 
of Temple, are printed by Woodfall in capitals. 



Ixxxiv INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 

Whether they were so printed in the PubHc Adver- 
tiser, we have not the means of determining. But 
we do not attach any importance to circiunstances of 
this description, which are as likely to be the result of 
mere accident, as of design. 



LETTERS 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS 



LETTER I. 

Salem, Massachusetts, August 20, 1830. 
Sir, 

When 1 saw you in town on the third instant, 
there was a paragraph in the Salem Gazette of that 
morning, stating, upon the authority of late London 
newspapers, that a person not hitherto named had been 
discovered to be the author of the Letters of Junius. 
The discovery was said to have been made from docu- 
ments in the library at Stowe ; the person alluded to was 
Lord Temple. I observed to you, that I had for many 
years considered Lord Temple to be the author, and I 
then gave some of the reasons which first led me to 
entertain that opinion — which, I may add, I have 
found no reason to abandon in consequence of anything 
I have seen published on the subject. 

The statements which I made on that occasion 
seemed to you to be entitled to attention ; and you ex- 
1 



<4 LETTERS ON THE 

pressed a wish, that I would give you my views on 
some of the principal points of the subject, which 
first led me to fix on Lord Temple as the author of 
those celebrated Letters ; accompanied with the proofs 
which I had found in confirmation of my opinion. 

This I shall now attempt to do ; relating every cir- 
cumstance, as it occurred during my investigation, and 
in that plain manner which will be expected from one, 
whose habits and business have been very different from 
that of an author. I shall perhaps detail many things 
which a skilful writer would throw aside as unnecessa- 
ry ; and I may, on the other hand, omit some that 
might be of importance. However this may be, you 
may rest assured, that whatever I communicate shall be 
truly stated ; and I must then leave the importance or 
unimportance of it to the judgment of the reader. 

It is many years since I first read Junius ; in my 
earliest days I was pleased in perusing his Letters, in 
the common editions, which had no explanatory notes, 
except the few written by the author himself. But soon 
after the publication of the valuable edition under the 
name of Robert Heron, Esq., printed in London in 
1801, and reprinted in America in 1804, I procured a 
copy of it and read it with much attention, and with 
new interest ; not, however, originally with the view of 
making a discovery of the author, — which had long 
defied the ingenuity of so many persons in England, 
more favorably circumstanced than I could be at a great 
distance from the scene, — but simply from the desire 
of more thoroughly understanding everything which 
was to be found in a favorite author. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 6 

The copy of Heron's Junius, which I owned, happen- 
ed to be one that contained the engraved portraits of 
several of the distinguished persons who are mentioned 
in the work. In some copies of the American edition, 
as I am informed, the portraits were suppressed; and 
had it happened, that I had purchased one of those, in- 
stead of the copy which I did, it is possible that my at- 
tention might not have been again excited, at that period, 
to a further investigation of the authorship. 

However that might have been, on one occasion, 
while I was turning over the leaves, referring to differ- 
ent passages of the work, and examining the portraits, 
I was struck with the singular circumstance, — for such 
it appeared to me, — of finding the portrait of Earl 
Temple conspicuously fronting the title-page, although, 
according to my recollection, his name icas not once men- 
tioned in the Letters, This circumstance led me to 
read the work once more; and I found, as I had anti- 
cipated, that, notwithstanding the names of the king's 
ministers and other leading men of that period, were 
repeatedly mentioned, the name of Lord Temple did not 
once occur in the Letters themselves, though it does a 
few times in the Notes which Junius himself added to 
them ; but even there the name is mentioned in so 
slight and casual a manner, as not to attract particular 
attention ; and, perhaps, in those few instances was in- 
serted with a design of avoiding the suspicion, which 
an entire suppression of it might have excited. I also 
examined Heron's notes, in which Lord Temple is nam- 
ed a few times. 

The result was, that I became by degrees, confirmed 
in the opinion, that Lord Temple must have been 
the author. 



4 LETTERS ON THE 

At that time I had not minutely studied the private 
history of the period when Junius wrote ; and I had of 
course an imperfect knowledge of the family connex- 
ions and private friendships or animosities of Lord 
Temple ; having only directed my attention to his polit- 
ical character, and to the part which he had taken in 
the public transactions of that day. I therefore began 
as opportunities offered during my leisure hours of read- 
ing, to make researches in order to obtain more particu- 
lar information respecting Lord Temple. Everything I 
read tended only to strengthen my original impressions. 
In the splendid administration of Mr Pitt (Lord Chat- 
ham), Earl Temple was of the ministry ; in the first in- 
stance, as first lord of the admiralty, and afterwards as 
lord privy seal. Mr Pitt was his brother-in-law, having 
married his sister ; Mr George Grenville, known in 
this country as the father of the famous American 
Stamp Act, was a younger brother, and also one of the 
ministry. In 1761, Lord Temple and Mr Pitt resigned 
their places, in consequence of a disunion among the 
ministers, but with an understanding, that they would 
still continue to act together. Mr Grenville, however, re- 
mained in office, and continued to act with his former 
associates. This unexpected conduct of Mr Grenville, 
caused an interruption of the friendship subsisting be- 
tween him an^ his two brothers. I could not but observe, 
however, that Junius always spoke of Mr Grenville with 
much respect, both personally and politically; and I 
soon found that a reconciliation had afterwards taken 
place — with many other particulars, which I shall 
mention in the course of my letters. I also found, that 
partly in consequence of the Duke of Grafton's de- 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. O 

serting Lord Chatham, after that great man had been 
the earliest object of the Duke's political wonder and at- 
tachment, Junius appeared to hold the Duke in utter 
detestation. 

I began to note down in my copy of Heron's Junius, 
and on the blank leaves of the volumes, various refer- 
ences to those passages, which appeared to me to sup- 
port the opinion I had formed respecting the author. 
This was done some years previous to 1817, which date 
I fix by an event to be mentioned hereafter. 

The copy of Heron's Junius here mentioned, was the 
one to which I alluded in my first conversation with 
you on this subject; when, in reply to your inquiry after 
the book itself, 1 observed, that it had been out of my 
possession for several years, but that I would endeavor 
to recover it. The fact was, that in May, 1825, I dis- 
posed of most of the books which constituted my li- 
brary, and among them was that copy of Junius. Im- 
mediately after our conversation I took measures to 
recover the book, but have not been able to succeed till 
this time ; which must be my apology for not fulfilling 
my engagement to you so soon as I had intended. I 
had an impression, as I then observed, that my Junius 
was in the possession of Dr F*****, in the neighbor- 
ing town of Beverly; and I accordingly addressed a 
note to him requesting the use of it for a short time ; 
but he informed me, that it was not in his possession. 

A further search led me, only the day before yester- 
day, to the gentleman who had it, Mr S****** of this 
town, in whose hands I was happy to find the vol- 
umes; and with my old notes, references, and paper 
marks remaining in them. Among other things, 
1* 



6 LETTERS ON THE 

my references to various passages of the old ' London 
Magazine,' of which I had about a hundred numbers, 
between the years 1763 and 1774. These Magazines 
had also for several years been out of my hands, having 
been left packed up with several other pamphlets in a 
trunk, in a neighboring town. I have been fortunate 
enough to find them again, with my old marks remain- 
ing as I had left them. 

In one of those old Magazines, for August, 1766, 
page 421, my attention was forcibly arrested by an ar- 
ticle headed — 'Extracts from a remarkable Pamphlet 
lately published, entitled An Enquiry into the Conduct 
of a late Right Honorable Commoner ' — i. e. William 
Pitt, afterwards Earl of Chatham.* The tone and man- 
ner of the writer, and especially the minute particulars 
of private occurrences disclosed in the pamphlet, left 
no doubt in my mind, that it was written by Lord Tem- 
ple. It was spoken of as a pamphlet which much en- 
grossed the public attention. The language and spirit 
of it were, in my opinion, those of Junius; and it bore 
internal evidence, equally strong, of having been written 
by Lord Temple. 

After the lapse of perhaps a year or two from the time 
of which I am now speaking, I noticed in the London 
Magazine for 1774, some letters of Lord Chesterfield, 
then just published ; in one of which, dated the same 
year with the pamphlet in question, 1766, he says to his 
son — ' You ask who is the author of the pamphlet ? ' 
His reply is — 'it is ascribed to Lord T ' and he 

* In the Gentleman's Ma gazi7ie for Aug. 17G6, p. 347, similar 
extracts from this pamphlet are given, and some of them more 
at large. — Edit. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 7 

adds — 'but I think it above him.' This last remark, 
as matter of opinion, had little weight in my mind ; 
the former, however, as a statement of the current re- 
port of the day, made a strong impression upon me ; as 
I supposed Lord Temple was the person alluded to, 
and I had myself, upon the internal evidence alone, and 
without the least knowledge of any such general opin- 
ion, already ascribed it to the same nobleman. The 
title of the pamphlet, it is true, is not mentioned by 
Lord Chesterfield ; but it was obviously, as I thought, 
the one in question. Assuming it, therefore, as a fact, 
that Lord Temple must have been the author of the 
pamphlet, I pursued my investigation upon that supposi- 
tion ; and this pamphlet was the means of my satisfying 
myself of the correctness of the opinion, which I had 
formed as to the authorship of Junius. 

Upon these data, I made memorandums and margi- 
nal references in my copy of Junius ; by means of which 
I shall collect together the substance of the present 
Letters. 

When I first conversed with you, I had no intention 
of prosecuting the subject any further, than to present a 
very brief and general view of what I considered to be 
satisfiictory evidence, — I would say demonstration, if 
it were not presumptuous — that LoiyI Temple was the 
author of Junius. By your desire, however, I will con- 
tinue my researches, and shall in future letters commu- 
nicate the results more in detail than I had before con- 
templated. I am, &c. 



LETTERS ON THE 



LETTER 11. 

Sir, 

In my last letter I observed, that I had originally 
assumed it as a fact, upon the internal evidence alone, 
that Lord Temple was the author of the remarkable 
pamphlet of 1766; and that I was fully confirmed in 
that opinion by the observation, which I there quoted 
from Lord Chesterfield's Letters, notwithstanding his 
lordship's accompanying remark, that he thought it 
' above him.' I have experienced no small gratification 
at finding what I consider a still further confirmation of 
my opinion, in the statement made by Mr Almon, the 
well known Whig printer of that day, in his Anecdotes 
of the Life of Lord Chatham, which I had never seen 
till the passage was recently pointed out to me by your- 
self Mr Almon introduces his copious extracts from 
the Pamphlet, with this remark, in a note ; — 'Lord 
Chesterfield, in his letters to his son, says, this pamphlet 
was written by Lord Temple. But his lordship was 
mistaken. The pamphlet was written by Mr Humphrey 
Cotes, assisted by another person. It is, however, true, 
that the particular facts stated in this account of the 
conference and of the audience, were communicated hy 
Lord Temple, in conversation, to Mr Cotes ; who, with- 
out Lord Temple's participation, caused them to be pub- 
lished.' From the language of this statement of Mr 
Almon, circumstanced as he was in relation to Lord 
Temple and other parties concerned, I have felt no hesi- 
tation in drawing the inference, that the substance of 
the pamphlet was in fact dictated, though perhaps not 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. \f 

actually committed to writing, by his lordship himself.* 
The reflections throughout, and the occasional intensity 
of passion could have proceeded from no other than the 
party, whose feelings had been so unjustly and so deeply 
wounded. 

This important pamphlet furnishes us with a solution 
of one of the difficulties, which has always embarrassed 
the inquiry into the authorship of Junius's Letters — 
that is, the vehemence with which Junius originally at- 
tacked Lord Chatham (in the Miscellaneous Letters 
published by Mr Woodfall), though he afterwards, 
under the signature of Junius, began to change his tone, 
by first coldly approving of his conduct, and at length 
bestowing upon him the splendid eulogy which is well 
known. At the former period, a violent difference had 
broken out between Lord Temple and Lord Chatham, 
which was felt by the former, in a manner that was to 
have been expected from a person of his temperament 
and disposition, as described — perhaps with partiality — 
by Mr Almon : ' The natural disposition of this noble 

* In a letter, which Mr Almon sent to Lady Chatham with a 
copy of his Anecdotes of Lord Chatham, he says — ' From your 
Ladyship's noble brother, the late Earl TenipJe,! receiyed the 
most interesting part of these Anecdotes ; his Lordship honored 
me with his friendship and esteem many years.' Whether Mr 
Almon knew the author of Junius, at this period (1791), we 
cannot determine ; but it is a little remarkable, that Junius is 
mentioned only twice, so far as I have observed, in this whole 
work ; once, in a note, volume i, p. 419, where he is spoken of 
merely as 'a, popular writer;' and once, in the Appendix to 
volume 3d, page 379, as cited p. 204 post. The manner in which 
Junius is barely mentioned in both places, is remarkable. It 
should be added, that one of his Miscellaneous Letters, signed 
Snti-Se,ianus, Jr. is mentioned by Almon, vol. i, p. 329. 



10 



LETTERS ON THE 



lord/ says the writer, 'was the most amiable that can be 
conceived, to his friends ; but when offended, his disap- 
probation was warm and conspicuous — his language 
flowed spontaneously from his feelings; his heart and 
his voice always corresponded. With such a temper, it 
was not probable, that the cause of his separation from 
Mr Pitt would either be concealed or indifferently ex- 
pressed.' * The pamphlet in question gives a minute 
account of the measures, and particularly of the haughty 
and overbearing deportment of Lord Chatham, which 
led to that separation, and compelled Lord Temple (in 
the language of the pamphlet) to refuse submission to 
Mr Pitt as ' sole and absolute dictator' in the ministry. 
But, as I shall have frequent occasion to advert to this 
separation and various other facts resulting from an ex- 
amination of this pamphlet, I shall here give several 
extracts from it, accompanied with a few brief remarks. 
The whole manner and tone of the pamphlet are such, 
as would naturally proceed from a v/ounded spirit like 
that above described. 

The author of the pamphlet begins with this observa- 
tion — that ' in the tide of almost every great man's life, 
there is commonly one period, which is not only more 
remarkable than the rest, but conveys with it strong 
characteristic marks of the complexion of him to whom 
it belongs;' and by way of example, he gives us some 
part of the history of the Lord Chancellor Bacon and 
others ; then he gives us a short history of the * Right 
Honorable Commoner' (Mr Pitt), and having carried it 
down to his being made paymaster, he proceeds thus : — 

^ Almon's Anecdotes, vol. ii, p. 28. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 11 

* For a little time he was quiet, but his ever restless 
ambition soon broke out, and he aimed at the sole guid- 
ance of the state, which he seemed resolved to take by 
storm. He thundered against Hanover, the very name 
of which he was for expunging out of the dictionary ; it 
was called a mill-stone hung about the neck of Great 
Britain, and styled the bane of this country, from the 
expense which it cost us ; and the most solemn declara- 
tions were made, that not a shilling nor a man should 
go to Germany. The popular gale wafts him into power, 
and though not to that degree of eminence in station, 
which constitutionally gives the lead in public business, 
yet he usurped an absolute dominion over the whole 
court. It is his nature to bear no control ; therefore the 
King was taken captive in his closet, and made prisoner 
upon his throne. But, as it were to atone for this con- 
duct, and to give the public another proof that not theirs 
but his own interest, was the object he had in view ; 
though absolute minister, and of course at full liberty to 
carry on the war upon whatever system he pleased, and 
a neutrality secured for Hanover ; yet he entered into 
all the predilections of his sovereign, broke the neutral- 
ity in Germany, and, notwithstanding his many furious 
and energetic declarations against the continent, the 
very sounds of which were tingling in our ears, he 
plunged us deeper into the German war than any of his 
predecessors; sent over more men and more money, 
than any other minister ever dared, and at an expense of 
above eighty millions, conquered America in Germany.'* 

* ' It is only curious from observ.-^lion of his natural inconsis- 
tency, to mention, that when the late Lord Anson was attacked 
in the House of Commons upon tiie loss of Minorca, the late 
Commoner (knowing that the late Lord Hardwicke was then the 



12 LETTERS ON THE 

* And to support this enormous load of expense, it was 
at his express injunction, that the last heavy additional 
duty was laid upon beer, even in opposition to the Duke 
of Newcastle and the late Mr Legge, who would other- 
wise have laid a tax upon the luxuries of life, in order 
to spare the industrious and put the burden upon the 
rich and idle — a tax cruelly wrung from the briny 
sweat of industry, and which seems to have been found- 
ed on no other principle, than, that in order to render 
the people dependent, we should begin by making them 
poor. Ever wishing to attain and preserve power by 
any sacrifice or any means, and finding soon after the 
accession of his present Majesty, that the Earl of Bute 
was in possession of the royal ear, he was the first and 
principal instrument of that noble lord's introduction to 
power, particularly to the post of secretary of state and 
coadjutor to himself; which shows, as clearly as any- 
thing can, his early and close connexion with the Favor- 
ite. And upon what principle could this be done, but 
the hope of thereby laying the foundation of security to 
himself 

' When the Favorite had gained the ascendancy, and 
had formed designs incompatible with the honor of the 
crown and the interest of the kingdom ; when he had 
drawn the substance and the shadow likewise of strength 
from the great Commoner, and defeated him also in his 
mighty design upon Spain ; then, even then, notwith- 

court's favorite) stood up to vindicate his Lordship, and said, 
" that lie was convinced his lordship had erred through want of 
intellect, and not through design." After this extraordinary 
declaration, he restored his lordship to that very post, for which 
he had pronounced him unqualified through deficiency of under- 
standing.' JVote by the author of the pamphlet. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 13 

Standing this insult and many others, such was either 
his lust for office, or his friendship for the favorite, that 
he would have sacrificed his haughty, overbearing spirit 
to a sufferance of remaining in office, and submitted to 
a control not only contradictory of all his former princi- 
ples, but infamous in the eyes of the public, had it not 
been for the spirited and truly patriotic resentment of 
his most noble friend and relation, Earl Temple ; who, 
with a magnanimity almost peculiar to himself, disdain- 
ed to wear the chains, or put on the livery of such an 
incompetent statesman, such a contemptible being ; 
and first strongly urged, and at length forced the Com- 
moner into resignation ; which he accompanied with 
his own, in order to give an example of spirit and resist- 
ance to an usurpation, so exceedingly dangerous to both 
court and people.' 

After having given an account of several fruitless ne- 
gotiations for bringing Mr Pitt again into the adminis- 
tration, he gives us an account of the then late successful 
one as follows : 

* The error last year had been in consulting Lord 
Temple first. This year another method was taken, 
Mr Pitt was^rs^ applied to ; and after that gentleman 
had had a conference, first with the late lord chancellor, 
and then with his majesty. Lord Temple was sent for ; 
who, directly after his coming to town, waited on his 
majesty at Richmond. Next day (July 16, 1766) his 
lordship received a very affectionate letter from Mr Pitt, 
then at North-End, Hampstead, desiring to see his lord- 
ship there, as his health would not permit him to come 
to town. His lordship went, and Mr Pitt acquainted 
him, that his majesty had been graciously pleased to send 
2 



14 LETTERS ON THE 

for him to form an administration ; and, as he thought 
his lordship indispensahlc, he desired his majesty to send 
for him, and to put him at the head of the treasury ; and 
that he himself would take the post of privy seal. The 
Commoner then produced a list of several persons, 
which, he said, he had fixed upon to go in with his lord- 
ship ; and which, he added, was not to be altered. 
Lord Temple said, that he had had the honor of a con- 
ference with his majesty at Richmond the evening be- 
fore, and that he did not understand, from what passed 
between them, that Mr Pitt was to be absolute master, 
and to form every part of the administration ; if he had, 
he would not have given himself the trouble of coming 
to Mr Pitt upon that subject, being determined to come 
in upon an equality with Mr Pitt, in case he was to oc- 
cupy the most responsible place under the government. 
And, as Mr Pitt had chosen only a side place, without 
any responsibility annexed to it, he should insist upon 
some of his friends being in the cabinet offices with 
him, and in whom he could confide ; which he thought 
Mr Pitt could have no objection to, as he must be sen- 
sible he could not come in with honor, unless he had 
such nomination ; nor did he desire but that Mr Pitt 
should have his share of the nomination of his friends. 
And his lordship added, that he made a sacrifice of his 
brother, Mr George Grenville, who, notwithstanding his 
being entirely out of place, and excluded from all con- 
nexion with the intended system, would nevertheless 
support the measures of their administration ; that it 
was his idea to conciliate all parties, which was the 
ground that made Mr Pitt's former administration so 
respectable and glorious, and to form upon the solid 



' AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 15 

basis of U?iion, an able and responsible administration ; 
to brace the relaxed sinews of government ; retrieve the 
honor of the crown, and pursue the permanent interest 
of the public : but, that if Mr Pitt insisted upon a supe- 
rior dictation, and did not choose to join in a plan for 
the restoration of that Union, which at no time was ever 
so necessary, he desired the conference might be broke 
off, and that Mr Pitt would give himself no further 
trouble about him, for that he would not submit to the 
proposed conditions. Mr Pitt, however, insisted upon 
continuing the conference ; and asked, who those per- 
sons were whom his lordship intended for some of the 
cabinet employments ? His lordship answered, that one 
in particular was a noble lord of approved character and 
known abilities, who had last year refused the very of- 
fice now offered to him (Lord Temple) though pressed 
to it in the strongest manner by the Duke of Cumber- 
land, and the Duke of Newcastle ; and who, being their 
common friend, he did not doubt Mr Pitt himself had in 
contemplation. This worthy and respectable person 
was Lord Lyttleton. At the conclusion of this sentence, 
Mr Pitt said, good God, how can you compare him to 
the Duke of Grafton, Lord Shelburne, and Mr Conway? 
Besides, said he, I have taken the privy seal and he 
cannot have that. Lord Temple then mentioned the post 
of lord president; upon which Mr Pitt said, that could 
not be, for he had engaged the presidency : but, says 
he, Lord Lyttleton may have a pension. To which 
Lord Temple immediately answered, that would never 
do; nor would he stain the bud of his administration 
with the accumulation of pensions. It is true Mr Pitt 
vouchsafed to permit the noble lord to nominate his own 



16 LETTERS ON THE 

board ; but at the same time insisted, that if two per- 
sons of that board (Thomas Townsend and George Ons- 
low, Esq.), were turned out, they should have a com- 
pensation, i. e. pensions. 

' Mr Pitt next asked, what person his lordship had in 
his thoughts for secretary of state ? His lordship answer- 
ed. Lord Gower, a man of great abilities, and whom he 
knew to be equal to any Mr Pitt had named, and of 
much greater alliance ; and in whom he meant and 
hoped to unite and conciliate a great and powerful par- 
ty, in order to widen and strengthen the bottom of his 
administration, and to vacate even the idea of opposi- 
tion ; thereby to restore unanimity in parliament, and 
confine every good man's attention to the real object of 
his country's welfare. And his lordship added, that he 
had never imparted his designs to Lord Gower, nor did 
he know, whether that noble Lord would accept of it; * 
but mentioned it now only as a comprehensive meas- 
ure, to attain the great end he wished, of restoring 
unanimity by a reconciliation of parties, that the busi- 
ness of the nation might go on without interruption, 
and become the only business of parliament. But Mr 
Pitt rejected this proposal, evidently healing as it ap- 
peared, by saying, that he had determined Mr Conway 
should stay in his present office, and that he had Lord 
Shelburne to propose for the other office, then held by 
the Duke of Richmond ; so that there remained no 
room for Lord Gower. This, Lord Temple said, was 
coming to his first proposition of being sole and abso- 
lute dictator, to luliich no consideration slioidd ever in- 

* ' Lord Temple afterwards wrote to Lord Gower, to excuse 
the mention he had made of his name.' 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 17 

ducc liini to submit. And therefore he insisted upon 
ending the conference ; which he did with saying, that if 
he had been first called upon by the king, he should have 
consulted Mr Pitt's honor, with regard to the arrange- 
ment of ministers, and have given him an equal share 
in the nomination ; and that he thought himself ill-treat- 
ed hy 3Ir Pitt, in his not observing the like conduct. 

' Had Mr Pitt not chosen to refuse a plan of govern- 
ment, so obviously calculated and designed for the good 
of the country, and for putting an end to those unhappy 
divisions which have long obstructed the public busi- 
ness, we should have seen an administration formed of 
the most able and upright men in the kingdom ; acting 
upon principles agreeable to the public wishes ; and 
whose natural strength and alliances, would have given 
such stability to their power, as would have afforded the 
most sincere satisfaction to the public, who are con- 
cerned and grieved at their repeated changes, made ap- 
parently without any design of restoring peace to the 
kingdom, or any desire of putting the direction of af- 
fairs into capable hands; changes obviously patched 
up, and consisting of nothing but a temporary succes- 
sion of men, whose names were almost unknown till 
they appeared in the Gazette. Changes made by the 
favorite, and designed to render all sets of men con- 
temptible, that he may at length, like Cardinal Maza- 
rine, publicly resume his power and tell the people, he is 
the only capable man in the kingdom.' 

This is followed, in the pamphlet, by some strictures 
upon the history of that Cardinal, who was advanced 
and protected in the administration of France by the 
Queen mother of Lewis XIV ; and upon Mr Pitt's 



18 LETTERS ON THE 

late acceptance of a title and a share with Lord Bute in 
the administration of this kingdom ; which the author 
concludes thus : 

' With whom, besides, is the late Commoner in 
league ? With those very men whom he hated most 
and despised ; with Gen. Conway, whom two years ago 
he refused to see at Hayes, though pressed to it in the 
strongest manner by Lord Lyttleton ; with Lord Shel- 
burne, upon whom he put a negative last year, when 
nominated to the very office he now enjoys ; with Col. 
Barre, who called him an heap of contradictions, 

&-C. &LC. 

' If it is asked, why had he so great a penchant for 
them now ? the answer is, because the first, in a great 
measure, laid the foundation of the surrender of the 
honor and authority of Great Britain, and made a ten- 
der of both at the feet of the Colonies ; the second as- 
sisted him, and the third follows of course. 

' This little corps, contemptible in numbers and des- 
picable in abilities, is to be reinforced by the subalterns 
of the late ministry ; by those whose excessive lust for 
office, whose ingratitude, meanness, and subserviency, 
would not suffer them to follow the resignations and dis- 
missions of their patrons. The moment these heard 
there was another recruiting sergeant in town, they in- 
stantly deserted both officers and colors under which 
they had first enlisted, and for present pay and good 
quarters, repaired to the drum-head of the enemy.' * 

In my next letter I shall make some remarks upon 
this extraordinary publication. I am, &lc. 

* In 1768 Lord Temple was reconciled with Mr Pitt. The 
Letters of Junius commenced in 1769. Then how much the 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 19 



LETTER III. 

Sir, 

The pamphlet, from which the extracts in my last 
letter were taken, will be found upon a careful perusal 
to carry its own evidence with it of having been writ- 
ten by Earl Temple. A writer in the London Maga- 
zine of August 176G. in attempting to controvert the 
arguments of the pamphlet, also assumes him to have 
been the author ;. and observes, that * he labors hard 
to prove that Lord Chatham is the willing tool of Lord 
Bute ; and, from the discovery thereof, Lord Temple, 
as must be supposed, declined taking part in the ad- 
ministration.' The same writer further says, 'that Lord 
Temple was offered the chief department of state, but 
he insisted on Lord Lyttleton being given that, which 
had previously been assigned to Lord North, ' and ' thus 
does it evidently appear that Lord Temple's objections 
were, not that the administration was to be framed or to 
proceed under the influence of Lord Bute, but to his 
not being permitted to recommend whom he pleased to 
some of the chief offices in government.' Again — ' as 
to Lord Temple's making so great a merit of sacrificing 
a brother (Mr Grenville, who had previously taken so 
great care of himself) .... that surely should appear 
strange, after a declaration having been made of their 
reconciliation being only kindred, and not political.' 



language and sentiments of this pamphlet, except towards Lord 
Cliatliam, coincide with the language and sentiments of Juni- 
us's Letters. 



20 LETTERS ON THE 

Again he says — ' it appears that Lord Temple had in 
effect separated from Lord Chatham, and thrown him- 
self at the head of a party, which the latter would not 
join, and therefore they are become like the kindred 
chiefs of Rome, each struggling for the superiority ; 
and which in the end will prevail, can only be foreseen 
by estimating the comparative degree of popularity, 
which each with his respective party, may be supposed 
to possess ; for thereon must depend, which will like 
Pompey, become vanquished, or victorious, like Cae- 
sar.' 

These extracts from a contemporary writer show 
the opinion entertained by Lord Temple of that ad- 
ministration ; and also, that he was himself, in some 
sense, a disappointed man. They also show the opin- 
ion, which his adversaries entertained of the greatness 
of his character, as well as his energy of mind. 

Junius, in his first letter and elsewhere, speaks of 
his brother, Mr GrenviUe, with particular respect. In 
animadverting upon the bad management of their 
finances under the Duke of Grafton, he observes, that 
* when Mr Grenville was placed at the head of the 
Treasury, he felt the impossibility of Great Britain's 
supporting such an establishment as her former suc- 
cesses had made indispensable But unfortu- 
nately for this country, Mr Grenville was at any 
rate to be distressed, because he was minister ; and 
Mr Pitt and Lord Camden were to be the patrons of 
America, because they were in opposition.' He adds 
in a note — ' yet Junius has been called the partizan 
of Lord Chatham !' 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 21 

This note by Junius illustrates, why he had been so 
called — because he had been politically opposed to Mr 
Grenville. But Lord Temple and he both were re- 
conciled to Lord Chatham in 1768, a few months be- 
fore the date of Junius's first letter. 

Taking it for granted then, that Lord Temple is the 
author, the extracts which I have given, viewed in con- 
nexion with Junius's letters, will throw that light which 
\VQ seek on the subject of the present inquiry. 

Junius, in his first letter observes, that ' appearances 
justify suspicion ; and, when the safety of a nation is 
at stake, suspicion is a just ground of inquiry. Let 
us enter into it with candor and decency.' I have 
already shown the detestation in which he held the 
Duke of Grafton. But Sir William Draper, being 
touched by the manner in which his commander, Lord 
Granby, is noticed, in a reply attempts his defence. 
This evidently leads Junius on to higher game, as in 
the sequel. In the 15th Letter he says — ' the advice 
of the ablest men in this country has been repeated- 
ly called for and rejected. The spirit of the favorite 
(Lord Bute) had some apparent influence upon every 
administration ; there were certain services to be per- 
formed for the favorite's security, which your prede- 
cessors in office had the wisdom or virtue not to 
undertake. The moment this refractory spirit was 
discovered, their disgrace was determined. Lord Chat- 
ham, Mr Grenville, and Lord Rockingham have suc- 
cessively had the honor of being dismissed for doing 
their duty to the public, rather than those compliances 
which were expected from their station.' 



22 LETTERS ON THE 

Here Junius might have added Lord Temple ; but 
he avoids naming himself throughout. 

Again — ' a submissive administration was at last col- 
lected from the desertion of all parties, interests, and 
connexions ; and nothing remained but to find a lead- 
er, for these gallant, well disciplined troops. Stand 
forth, my Lord, for thou art the * man. Lord Bute 
found no resource of dependance or security in the 
proud, imposing superiority of Lord Chatham's abili- 
ties ; the shrewd, inflexible judgment of 3Ir Gren- 
villc, ' &.C. 

Remarks. — The one (Lord Chatham) had been an 
honorable competitor and was brother-in-law to Mr 
Grenville ; the other, (Mr Grenville) his brother ; and 
both, for some time, at variance with Lord Temple, alias 
Junius, but now friends. The great objects of Lord 
Temple in writing Junius, were — 1st, to establish his 
own everlasting fame ; 2d, that of his family connex- 
ions, at the same time he was attempting to establish 
the rights of Englishmen ; he therefore aimed the 
boldest invectives against the administration, knowing 
that by its overthrow, he and his friends would come 
into power, and that he should thereby gratify his own 
ambition ; but directing that ambition to the seeking 
of his country's honor and welfare. 

In his 18th Letter, which is addressed to Sir Wm. 
Blackstone, he again mentions his brother, Mr Gren- 
ville, thus: * Your pamphlet then is divided into an 
attack of Mr Grenville' s character, and a defence of 
your own. It would have been more consistent per- 

^ Granby, 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 23 

haps with your professed intentions to have confined 

yours to the last It is not my design to enter into 

a formal vindication of Jfr Grenville upon his own prin- 
ciples Your first reflection is, that Mr Gren- 
ville was, of all men, the person who should not have 
complained of inconsistence with regard to Mr 
Wilkes,' &LC. See also 19th Letter, the same subject 
continued, and Mr Grenville defended by Philo Junius. 
In Letter 23d (to the Duke of Bedford) he says — ' I 
will not pretend to specify the secret terms, on which 
you were invited to support an administration, which 
Lord Bute pretended to leave in full possession of 
their ministerial authority and perfectly masters of 
themselves.' — The administration, as appears by a 
note, was composed of Mr Grenville, Lord Halifax, 
and Lord Egremont. 

Again — ' Apparently united with Mr Grenville, you 
waited until Lord Rockingham's feeble administration 
should dissolve in its own weakness. The moment 
their dismission was suspected, the moment you per- 
ceived another system was adopted in the closet, you 
thought it no disgrace, to return to your former depend- 
ence and solicit once more the friendship of Lord Bute, 
You begged an interview, at which he had spirit 
enough to treat you with contempt.' 

It may not be without use to add, in this connexion, 
Lord Chesterfield's sentiments of the administrations, 
from his letters to his son, between 1763 and 1768, 
published in the London Magazine for 1774: — 

' July 15th, 1765 — I told you in my last you should 
hear from me again, as soon as I had any thing more 
to write ; and now I have too much to write and will 



24 LETTERS ON THE 

refer you to the Gazette Many more changes 

are talked of; I do not remember, in my time, to have 
seen so much at once as an entire new board of treas- 
ury and two new secretaries of state, &lc. 

' Here is a new political arch almost built, but of 
materials of so different a nature, and without a key 
stone, that it does not, in my opinion, indicate either 
strength or duration. It will certainly require repairs 
and a key stone next winter, and that key stone must 
be Mr Pitt. It is true he might have been that key 
stone now ; and would have accepted it, but not witJi- 
out Lord Twiple^s consent ; and Lord Temple posi- 
tively refused. There was evidently some trick in this, 
but what, is past my conjecturing.' But see Lord 
Temple's pamphlet above quoted, for a very different 
account of this affair. 

'August 25th, 1765 — I do not knov/ whether you 
have the Daily Advertiser, and the Public Advertiser, 
in which all the political letters are inserted, and some 
very well written ones on both sides ; but I know, that 
they amuse me for an hour or two every morning. 
Lord Temple is the supposed author of the pamphlet 
you mention ; but I think it above him. Perhaps his 
brother, who is no ways satisfied with the present ar- 
rangement, may have assisted him,' 

It is evident, that Lord Chesterfield had not read the 
pamphlet from which I have above given extracts (and 
which was written, as I have no doubt, by Lord Tem- 
ple), for he gives a wrong reason for Mr Pitt's not be- 
ing that key stone now. Neither does he justly ap- 
preciate the talents of Lord Temple. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 25 

I give one more extract from Lord Chesterfield, as cor- 
roborating that part of Lord Temple's pamphlet, which 
speaks of Mr Pitt's not being satisfied with anything 
short of being dictator. It is dated August 17th, 1765. 

' You have seen there has been changes at Court 

I believe there must be more, before a ministry is set- 
tled ; what those will be, God knows. Were 1 to 
conjecture, I should say the whole will centre in Mr 
Pitt. 

* August 1st, 1766 — The curtain was at last drawn 
up, the day before yesterday, and discovered the new- 
actors, together with the old ones. Mr Pitt, who had 
carte blanche given him, named every one of them ; 
but what would you think he named himself for ? Lord 
privy seal, and (what will astonish you as it does every 
mortal here) Earl of Chatham. The joke is here, 
ihRt he h.n.d a fall ujp stairs , and has done himself so 
much hurt, that he will never be able to stand upon 
his legs again. Every body is puzzled how to account 
for this step ; though it would not be the first time 
that great abilities have been duped by low cunning. 
But be it what it will, he is now certainly only Earl of 
Chatham, and no longer Mr Pitt, in any respect what- 
ever It is a measure so unaccountable, that 

nothing but proof positive could have made me believe 

it ; but true it is Charles Townsend has now 

the sole management of the House of Commons ; but 
how long he will be content to be only Lord Chatham's 
vicegerent there, is a question which I will not pretend 
to decide. There is one very bad sign for Lord Chat- 
ham's new dignity, which is, that all his enemies with- 
out exception rejoice at it; and all his friends are 
3 



26 



LETTERS ON THE 



stupified and dumbfounded .... when this ministry is 
settled, it be the sixth ministry in six years' time.' 

The following extracts from the Notes to Heron's 
valuable edition of Junius, will throw still further light 
upon the history of the administrations of that period ; 
a knowledge of which is indispensable in this inquiry. 

In Letter llth, to the Duke of Grafton, Junius says, 
' The system you seem to have adopted, when Lord 
Chatham unexpectedly left you at the head of affairs, 
gave us no promise,' &c. ; upon which Heron has this 
Note : — ' Upon the dismission of the Buckingham ad- 
ministration, Lord TempJe, partly, as it should seem, 
for want of penetration and comprehension of mind, 
partly from honesty, and in part from an ungenerous 
personal resentment, refused, as he had formerly done, 
to assist in the formation of a new ministry, unless he 
might be assured, that the king would, on all occa- 
sions, adopt whatever principles of policy he should 
choose to dictate, and would employ those, and only 
those servants, whom he should recommend. Such 
terms, it would not have become the sovereign to com- 
ply with. Lord Chatham had a mind incapable of 
dealing so ungenerously with his prince. He formed 
an administration to succeed the party of Lord Rock- 
ingham, in which a nomination of men from all parties 
was attempted, to the exclusion of none but the un- 
wavering adherents of Rockingham and Temple. The 
Duke of Grafton had been secretary of state under the 
Marquis of Rockingham. He abandoned that admin- 
istration, when he found their fall was near. Attach- 
ing himself to Lord Chatham and appointed first 
lord of the treasury, while Chatham reserved for him- 
self the place of lord privy seal in the new ministry.' 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 



27 



It is truly surprising, that a writer so familiar with 
the history of that period, as the author of the above 
Note appears to have been, should have formed such 
an estimate of the talents of Lord Temple, as to imag- 
ine, that he refused to assist in forming a new minis- 
try, ' in part for want of penetration and comprehen- 
sion of mind.' The very fact, that he was called upon 
jointly with Lord Chatham for that purpose, if there 
were no other proof of abilities, would of itself strong- 
ly show the opinion entertained of him by those per- 
sons, who had the best opportunities of knowing his 
talents. But Lord Temple, in his pamphlet, as we 
have seen, gives a better reason for his declining to 
act on that occasion. 

On Letter l-2th, to the Duke of Grafton, 1769, He- 
ron has this Note : — 

' The parties of the Duke of Newcastle, and of Pitt 
and Lord Temple, were now both in opposition. Lord 
Egremont and the Earl of Granville died ; and the Duke 
of Bedford and his friends were introduced to the minis- 
try. These ministers became disagreeable to their 
sovereign ; and attempts were made by the Earl of 
Bute, by the sovereign himself, by the Duke of Cum- 
berland, to prevail with Mr Pitt, Lord T'emple, and 
Lord Lyttleton, to form a new ministry, and to occupy 
its principal places. These attempts were unsuccess- 
ful, because the sovereign would not deliver himself 
up into the hands of Mr Pitt and Lord Temple, so un- 
conditionally as they required.' 

I may remark upon this Note, that Lord Temple's 
pamphlet, to which I have referred, sets this matter 
also in its proper light. 



28 



LETTERS ON THE 



In Heron's Notes on Letter 15th, addressed to the 
Duke of Grafton, the following remark occurs : 

' At the time these letters were written. Lord Chatham 
Lord Temple, the Marquis of Rockingham, and Mr 
George Grenville, acted in union.' 

In the text, to which the above is a note, Junius 
says — 'The moment this refractory spirit was dis- 
covered, their disgrace was determined. Lord Chat- 
ham, Mr Grenville, and Lord Rockingham have suc- 
cessively had the honor to be dismissed for preferring 
their duty, as servants to the public, to those compli- 
ances which were expected from their station.' 

And why did not Junius name Lord Temple with 
these other three ? I can imagine no other reason than 
to avoid speaking of himself. 

Again — Junius speaks emphatically of ' the shrewd, 
inflexible judgment of Mr Grenville.' 

Note by Heron. ' This gentleman was a younger 
brother of Lord Temple and brother-in-law to Lord 

Chatham In parliament he acted with his elder 

brother, afterwards Earl Temple, with Mr Pitt, and 

Sir George Lyttleton When Mr Pitt and Lord 

Temple retired abruptly from office, Mr Grenville was 
persuaded to co-operate with his brother-in-law, the 

Earl of Egremont, under the banners of Lord Bute 

On the resignation of Lord Bute he was raised to the 
place of first lord of the treasury. He was the author 
of the famous stamp-act, and of the first persecution of 

Mr Wilkes He had been at variance with his 

brother. Lord Temple, ever since that nobleman re- 
tired from office ; hut they were now reconciled. He 
continued, ever after, in opposition to the ministers. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 29 

.... In 1768, both he and Lord Temple were fully 
reconciled to Lord Chatham.' 

Junius's Letter to Sir Wm. Blackstone 17(39 : — 
* Your first reflection is, that Mr Grenville was of all 
men, the person who should not have complained of 
inconsistence v/iih regard to Mr Wilkes. This, sir, 
is an unmeaning sneer, a peevish expression of resent- 
ment, or, if it means anything, you plainly beg the 
question ; for whether his conduct has or has not been 
inconsistent with regard to Mr Wilkes remains to be 
proved.' 

Junius's last letter is addressed to Lord Camden, 
and closes the series thus : -^ 

* Considering the situation and abilities of Lord 
Mansfield, I do not scruple to affirm with the most 
solemn appeal to God for my sincerity, that in my 
judgment, he is the very wor^t and most dangerous 
man in the kingdom. Thus far I have done my duty 
in endeavoring to bring him to punishment. But 
mine is an inferior, ministerial office, in the Temple 
of justice, I have bound the victim and dragged him 
to the altar.' 

The reasons for this extreme hostility to Lord 
Mansfield will appear hereafter. 

In a note to Letter 7, to the Duke of Grafton, Heron 
says — ' The North Briton, the work of John Wilkes, 
assisted by Charles Churchill and Lord Temple, was 
admirably addressed to every popular prejudice and 
passion, and contributed, therefore, in an extraordina- 
ry degree to inflame both high and low, especially 
about the metropolis, with mingled rage and contempt 
against the government.' 
3* 



30 LETTERS ON THE 

When therefore Lord Temple commenced writing 
the Letters of Junius, he had become ah-eady practis- 
ed in that kind of skill, which should operate like 
•enchantment, on high and low, on both mobs and 
and lords, on the unlearned and the learned. 

In the Notes on Letter 35th, to the King, Heron re- 
marks — ' It was published on the eve of an occasion 
upon which the Whigs hoped, at last, to force them- 
selves in a body into administration on their own 
terms. The Grenvilles, the Earl of Chatham, the 
Marquis of Rockingham, with their adherents, were 
now united, ' &c. 

Letter 35th. The distance of the Colonies, &c. 

Note by Heron : ' It should seem, as if, in writing 
this paragraph, Junius felt himself at a loss, whether 
to be of the opinion of Mr Grenville, or that of Lord 
'Chatham, in respect to the treatment of the Ameri- 
cans.' 

It being Lord Temple who wrote, he was at a loss ; 
the remarks would apply to no other man. 

Letter 39th. ' The cause of the public was under- 
taken and supported by men, whose abilities and unit- 
ed authority, to say nothing of the advantageous 
ground they stood on, might well be thought sufficient 
to determine a popular question in favor of the peo- 
ple.'* Junius. 

Letter 52d. Note by Heron : — ' Mr Wilkes was ap- 
pointed to the chief command of a regiment. The 
Grenvilles were his friends. Lord Temple, his 

* Note by Heron — ' Lord Chatham, Lord Camden, Lord Tem- 
ple, Mr Beckford, Mr Dowdeswell.' Similar remai-ks as in the 
pamphlet, &c. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 31 

neiglihor in the country ; and during the ministry of 
Pitt and Temple, Wilkes was an adherent, and even 
a favorite of the ministers. When Pitt and Lord 
Temple retired from official employment, Wilkes was 
led to adopt, with warmth, the resentments of his 
friend Temple.' 

Letter 52d. Note by Heron : — ' The papers of the 
North Briton were written with purity and liveliness 
of style, with great violence of satire, with a know- 
ledge of the most secret anecdotes of the time, with a 
perfect adaptation of their spirit to the tone of vulgar 
prejudice, sometimes with genuine strokes of serious 
eloquence, never without consi<lerable depth and force 
of arcTument. Their success both in irritating^ the 
ministry, and gratifying the opposition, was truly 
astonishing.' 

And Lord Temple largely contributed to that publi- 
cation ; yet the man who penned the note above, did 
not suspect him of being the author of Junius ! 

Letter 52d. Heron's note. — ' The outcry on account 
of the persecution of Wilkes, contributed to unsettle 
the administration in which George Grenville was con- 
nected with the Duke of Bedford. The promise of a 
reversal of the proceedings against him by the leaders 
of the opposition, if they should come into office, was 
a lure for popularity, held out to the nation. Perhaps 
Earl Temple — and if so, he alone .... was sincere. 
But they were all taken at their word, and the strength 
of opposition was greatly increased by the friends of 
W^ilkes.' 

Who writes the notes to this edition of Junius? 
Lord Temple is always best spoken of. 



32 LETTERS ON THE 

Letter 55th. — ' Lord Lyttleton's integrity and judg- 
ment are unquestionable — yet he is known to admire 
that cunning Scotchman, and verily believes Mm an 
honest man.' Junius. 

Note by Heron — 'Lord Geo. Lyttleton — The 
autlior of the Essay on the conversion of St Paul — 
the orator, poet, and statesman. He was truly a good 
man, and a man of talents. His approbation was, 
therefore, a noble testimony in favor of Lord Mans- 
field.' 

And I add, that this Lord Lyttleton is the same, 
whom Lord Temple proposed to Mr Pitt, to join 
them in the administration, of the failure of which, 
Lord Temple so loudly complains in the pamphlet 
against Mr Pitt. 

Letter 55th. As for the common sordid views, &C. 
' This praise of Lord Chatham, is manly and noble ; 
it is at the same time, artful, Junius praises Lord Chat- 
ham's talents and exertions ; avoids speaking of his 
disinterestedness, or selfish ambition; shews that he him- 
self was not that nobleman's creature. ' 

Lord Temple has given sufficient evidence of that. 
Is this writer blind, that he did not see it ? 

I could go on multiplying the proofs to be found in 
support of my opinion ; but I fear I must already have 
fatigued you. What I now send you has been hastily 
put together, amidst continual interruptions of business, 
in the course of two or three days ; which must be my 
apology for the disconnected form in which they appear. 
But I have sent you a key, that will unlock the casket ; 
I am sure the jewel is there. 

I am. sir, &.c. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 33 

LETTER IV. 

Sir, 

In connexion with the pamphlet of 1766, which, 
for the sake of brevity, I shall call Lord Temple's, I 
beg leave to ask your attention to a letter written by 
Junius, under one of his other signatures, PopUcola, 
shortly after the publication of that pamphlet. The 
pamphlet, it will be recollected, appeared about the 
month of August 1766 ; and the letter, to which I now 
refer, is dated April 28, 1767, being the first of the 
miscellaneous letters published by Mr. G. Woodfall, 
and the first of Junius's known publications subsequent 
to the pamphlet, and subsequent to the open and vio- 
lent rupture between Lord Temple and Lord Chatham, 
already mentioned. The perfect correspondence be- 
tween the pamphlet and this letter, in the general train 
of reflections, the strong feeling, and even the style of 
expression, plainly indicate them to have proceeded 
from one source ; and we may justly apply to this, as 
well as other letters, his own remark — ' When he hon- 
ors them [the objects of his attacks] with his notice, it 
is not a momentary blast. He gathers like a tempest, 
and all the fury of the elements burst upon them at 
once.' The letter is as follows : 

' FOR THE PUBLIC ADVERTISER. 

28fA April, 1767. 

* The bravest and freest nations have sometimes sub- 
mitted to a temporary surrender of their liberties, in 



34 LETTERS ON THE 

order to establish them forever. At a crisis of public 
calamity or danger, the prudence of the state placed a 
confidence in the virtue of some distinguished citizen, 
and gave him power sufficient to preserve or to oppress 
his country. Such was the Roman dictator, and while 
his office was confined to a short period, and only ap- 
plied as a remedy to the disasters of an unsuccessful 
war, it was usually attended with the most important 
advantages, and left no dangerous precedent behind. 
The dictator, finding employment for all his activity in 
repulsing a foreign invasion, had but little time to con- 
trive the ruin of his own country, and his ambition 
was nobly satisfied by the honor of a triumph and the 
applause of his fellow citizens. But as soon as this 
wise institution was corrupted, when that unlimited 
trust of power, which should have been reserved for 
conjunctures of more than ordinary difficulty and haz- 
ard, was without necessity committed to one man's un- 
certain moderation, what consequence could be expected, 
but that the people should pay the dearest price for 
their simplicity, nor ever resume those rights, which 
they could vainly imagine were more secure in the 
hands of a single man, than where the laws and consti- 
tution had placed them. 

' Without any uncommon depravity of mind, a man 
so trusted might lose all ideas of public principle or 
gratitude, and not unreasonably exert -himself to perpet- 
uate a power, which he saw his fellow citizens weak 
and abject enough to surrender to him. But if, instead 
of a man of common mixed character, whose vices 
might be redeemed by some appearance of virtue and 
generosity, it should have unfortunately happened, that 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 35 

a nation had placed all their confidence in a man pure- 
ly and perfectly bad, if a great and good prince, by 
some fatal delusion, had made choice of such a man 
for his first minister, and had delegated all his authori- 
ty to him, what security would that nation have for its 
freedom, or that prince for his crown 1 The history of 
every nation, that once had a claim to liberty, will tell 
us what would be the progress of such a traitor, and 
what the probable event of his crimes.* 

'Let us suppose him arrived at that moment, at which 
he might see himself within reach of the great object, 
to which all the artifices, the intrigues, the hypocrisy 
and the impudence of his past life were directed. On 
the point of having the whole power of the crown com- 
mitted to him, what would be his conduct? an affectation 
of prostrate humility in the closet, but a lordly dicta- 
tion of terms to the people, by whose interest he had 
been supported, by whose fortunes he had subsisted. 
Has he a brother ? that brother must be sacrificed. t 

' * This severe invective is aimed against the late Lord Chat- 
ham, formerly the Rt. Hon. Wm. Pitt. The reader, by a pe- 
rusal of the preceding letters, is already acquainted with the 
utter aversion which Junius at first felt for this nobleman, on 
various political accovmts, and especially on the subject of 
the American dispute. His aversion, however, softened as their 
political views approximated, and was at length converted into 
approbation and eulogy.' [His reversion however did not 
soften till Mr Pitt withdrew from a weak administration in 
disgust, and joined his brothers, Lord Temple and Mr Gren- 
ville. N. ] JS'ote to G. Woodf. cd. vol. 2. p. 453, London cd. 

' t Lord Temple, brother-in-law to Lord Chatham. They re- 
signed their respective offices, the former, of privy seal, and 
the latter, as principal secretary of state, in Oct. 17G1. Lord 



36 LETTERS ON THE 

Has he a rancorous enemy ? that enemy must be pro- 
moted.* Have years of his life been spent in declaiming 
against the pernicious influence of a favorite ? that fa- 
vorite must be taken to his bosom, and made the only 
partner of his power, f But it is in the natural course 
of things that a despotic power, which of itself violates 
every principle of a free constitution, should be acquir- 
ed by means, which equally violate every principle of 
honor and morality. The office of a grand vizier is 
inconsistent with a limited monarchy, and never can 
subsist long but by its destruction. The same meas- 
ures, by which an abandoned profligate is advanced to 
power, must be observed to maintain him in it. The 
principal nobility, who might disdain to submit to the 
upstart insolence of a dictator, must be removed from 
every post of honor and authority ; all public employ- 
ments must be filled with a despicable set of creatures, 
who, having neither experience nor capacity, nor any 
weight or respect in their own persons, will necessari- 
ly derive all their little busy importance from him. 
As the absolute destruction of the constitution of his 
country would be his great object, to be consistent 
with that design he must exert himself to weaken and 
impoverish every rank and order of the community, 
which by the nature of their property, and the degree 

Temple was succeeded by the Duke of Bedford ; and up- 
on Lord Chatham's forming his administration in 17()(), lie took 
the post of privy seal himself. Lord Temple did not take 
part in any ministry arranged subsequent to his resignation of 
that office, and died Sept. 11, 1779.' Woodf. ed. 

' * The Duke of Bedford.' Woodf. ed. 

* t Lord Bute.' Woodf. ed. 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 37 

of their wealth, might have a particular interest in the 
support of the established government, as well as pow- 
er to oppose any treacherous attempts against it. The 
landed estate must be oppressed ; the rights of the 
merchant must be arbitrarily invaded, and his property 
forced from him by main force, without even the form 
of a legal proceeding. It will assist him much, if he 
can contribute to the destruction of the poor, by con- 
tinuing the most burthensome taxes upon the main 
articles of their subsistence. He must also take 
advantage of any favorable conjuncture to try how far 
the nation will bear to see the established laws suspend- 
ed by proclamation ; and, upon such occasions, he must 
not be without an apostate lawyer, weak enough to 
sacrifice his own character, and base enough to betray 
the laws of his country.* 

' These are but a few of the pernicious practices by 
which a traitor may be known, by which a free people 
may be enslaved. But the masterpiece of his treache- 
ry, and the surest of answering all his purposes, would 
be, if possible, to foment such discord between the 
mother country and her colonies, as may leave them 
both an easier prey to his own dark machinations. 
With this patriotic view, he will be ready to declare 
himself the patron of sedition and a zealous advocate 
for rebellion. His doctrines will correspond with the 
proceedings of the people he protects ; and if by his 
assistance they can obtain a victory over the supreme 
legislature of the empire, he will consider that victory 

* ' The character alluded to is Earl Cambden, at that time 
Lord Chancellor.' Woodf. ed. 

4 



38 LETTERS ON THE 

as an important step towards the advancement of his 
main design. * 

' Such, sir, in any free state, would probably be the 
conduct and character of a man unnecessarily trusted 
with exorbitant power. He must either succeed in es- 
tablishing a tyranny or perish. I cannot without hor- 
ror suppose it possible that this our native country 
should ever be at the mercy of so black a villain. But 
if the case should happen hereafter, I hope the Brit- 
ish people will not be abandoned by Providence, as not 
to open their eyes time enough to save themselves from 
destruction ; and though we have no Tarpeian rock 
for the immediate punishment of treason, yet we have 
impeachment, and a gibbet is not too honorable a situ- 
ation for the carcase of a traitor.' 

I shall make some further remarks on this letter 
hereafter. I am, &.c. 

* Lord Chatham, then Mr Pitt, opposed Mr George Grenville's 
[brother to Lord Temple] stamp act, and denied the right of the 
parUament of Great Britain to legislate for America.' Wood- 
falVs edition. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 



LETTER V. 

Sir, 

I have given you, at large, the first of Jiinius's 
Miscellaneous Letters, as corresponding most remark- 
ably in its spirit and train of thought, with Lord 
Temple's pamphlet. I may add, that the second and 
third of those letters are also of the same stamp, par- 
ticularly in relation to Lord Chatham — who, as well 
as his ministry, was assailed with the most unsparing 
severity until the period when the reconciliation took 
place between him and Lord Temple, which was in 
the autumn of the year 1768. I must content my- 
self with referring, for proof of this, to the Miscellane- 
ous Letters from April 28, 1767, down to the 19th of 
October, 1768 ; three days previous to which last, Lord 
Chatham had resigned his post of privy seal.* In that 
letter, under the signature of Atticus, after animad- 
verting upon the other ministers, he says — * The Earl 
of Chatham — I had much to say, but it were inhu- 
man to persecute, when Providence has marked out 
the example to mankind!' Lord Chatham was at 
this time, says Woodfall, so severely tortured and 
worn away by the gout that it was supposed he would 
never be able to resume an active part in politics. 
But shortly after this, November 14th, his tone is 
much moderated towards Lord Chatham, who from 
this period gradually becomes the subject of his prais- 
es — 'he grows upon his esteem ' — * from that 
moment I began to like him,^ &/C. 

'^Woodfali's Junius, vol, 3, p. 175. 



40 LETTERS ON THE 

The letter next in date to this, is a very friendly one 
of December 15, 1768, addressed to the Right Hon. 
George Grenville, his brother ; and next to that, in 
order, is the first of the regular series under the signa- 
ture of Junius, dated January 21, 1769 ; to which is sub- 
joined the note which I have before quoted — ' Yet Ju- 
nius has been called the partizan of Lord Chatham ! ' — 
a remark which must have been called forth by his ad- 
versaries ' noticing the recent change of his tone towards 
that noble Lord. From this time through the whole 
period of Junius's Letters, Lord Temple, Mr Grenville 
and Lord Chatham, remained on friendly terms. 

Mr Almon says : — * Lord Chatham had unceasing- 
ly lamented his difference with Lord Temple, from the 
time it happened ; and being now [1768], emancipated 
from the connexions of office, and even from the 
suspicion of a connexion with the court, he sought the 
friendship of his brother with anxiety and sincerity. 
On this occasion he made Mr Calcraft his confidant. 
He confessed to him that almost every body else had 
betrayed him — his brother, he said, had indeed abused 
him ; but it was in the warmth of his temper and the 
openness of his nature, which was superior to all hy- 
pocrisy, or concealment of disapprobation. Mr Cal- 
craft approved himself a cordial and assiduous mediator. 
He accomplished their reconciliation ; they had no 
more differences afterwards; and they were, if possible, 
more affectionately united than ever they had been. 
Mr Grenville perfectly acceded to the union.' * The 
same writer, in another part of his work, observes : — 
' These two great men united made a host against the 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. 2, p. 74. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 4fl 

\vorld ; but, when separated, they became the instru- 
ments of two factions, both of them without intending 
it, and for some time without perceiving it ; Lord Chat- 
ham of the court, and Lord Temple of the opposition.'* 

The character here given of Lord Temple's talents, 
is widely different, as you perceive, from that which I 
formerly quoted from Lord Chesterfield and which I 
never could consider to be a just one. In connexion 
with this opinion of Mr Almon, I may add an extract 
from one of Mr Wilkes's letters, to the same point : — 
* Lord Chatham declared in parliament the strongest 
attachment to Lord Temple, one of the greatest char- 
acters our country could ever boast, and said he would 

live and die with his noble brothe?' He saw 

early the hostile intentions of Spain, and if the 
written advice had been followed, a very few weeks 
had probably closed the last general war ; although the 
merit of that advice was more the merit of his 7ioble 
brother [Lord Temple], than his own.' t 

While I am upon this part of the subject, as I have, 
from Lord Temple's Pamphlet, given his account of the 
rupture with Mr Pitt, which followed their joint resig- 
nation, it is proper also to insert here Mr Pitt's letter, 
which was written in justification of himself for hav- 
ing so soon after that resignation, taken a course, 
which, assuredly, Lord Temple had no reason to expect 
under such circumstances. The letter in question was 
addressed by Mr Pitt to a friend in the city, and is as 
follows : 

^ Anecdotes vol. 2, p. 31. 

t Woodfall's Junius, Miscell. Lett. vol. 2, p. 457, note to 
Lett. 2. 

4* 



42 LETTERS ON THE 

'Dear Sir — Finding to my great surprise that the 
cause and manner of my resigning the seals, is grossly 
misrepresented in the city, as well as the most gracious 
and spontaneous marks of his majesty's approbation of 
my services, which marks followed my resignation, 
have been infamously traduced as a bargain for my 
forsaking the public, I am under a necessity of declar- 
ing the truth of both these facts, in a manner which I 
am sure no gentleman will contradict. A difference of 
opinion with regard to measures to be taken against 
Spain, of the highest importance to the honor of the 
crown, and to the most essential national interests, 
and this founded on what Spain had already done, 
not on what that court may further intend to do, 
was the cause of my resigning the seals. Lord Tem- 
ple and I submitted in writing, and signed by us, 
our most humble sentiments to his majesty, which being 
overruled by the united opinion of all the rest of the 
king's servants, I resigned the seals on the 5th of this 
month, in order not to remain responsible for measures 
which I was no longer allowed to guide. Most public 
marks of his majesty's approbation of my services 
followed ray resignation ; they are unmerited and un- 
solicited, and I shall ever be proud to have received 
them from the best of sovereigns. 

'I will now only add, my dear sir, that I have ex- 
plained these matters only for the honor of truth, not in 
any view to court return of confidence from any man, 
who, with a credulity as weak as it is injurious, has 
thought fit hastily to withdraw his good opinion from 
one who has served his country with fidelity and suc- 
cess, and who justly reveres the upright and candid 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 4^3' 

judgment of it ; little solicitous about the censures of 
the capricious and the ungenerous. Accept my sin- 
cerest acknowledgments for all your kind friendship, and 
believe me ever, with truth and esteem, my dear sir, 
your faithful friend. W. Pitt.' 

' Oct. 14, 1765.' 

On this letter I would only ask — Could Lord Tem- 
ple have thought it for ' the honor of truth,' that Mr 
Pitt should concert measures jointly with him and 
withdraw from the ministry, and then immediately 
accept the most public marks of court favor, to the 
exclusion, or rather, I might say, the desertion of Lord 
Temple ? In corroboration of Lord Temple's testimo- 
ny against Mr Pitt, I now give an extract of a letter 
from Mr Wilkes to the Duke of Grafton, then the friend 
of Wilkes ; it is dated at Paris : — 

' I believe the flinty heart of Lord Chatham has 
known the sweets of private friendship, and the fine 
feelings of humanity, as little as even Lord Mansfield. 
They are both formed to be admired not beloved. A 
proud, insolent, over-bearing, ambitious man is always 
full of the ideas of his own importance, and vainly imag- 
ines himself superior to the equality necessary among 
real friends, in all the moments of true enjoyment. 
Friendship is too pure a pleasure for a mind cankered 

with ambition or the lust of power and grandeur 

Lord Chatham declared in parliament the strongest 
attachment to Lord Temple, one of the greatest char- 
acters our country could ever boast, and said he would 
live and die with his noble brother. He has received 
oblicrations of the first magrnitude from that noble broth- 



44 LETTERS ON THE 

er, yet what trace of gratitude or of friendship was ever 
found in any part of his conduct, and has he not now 
declared the most open variance, and even hostility 1 ' 

Compare with this the passages inserted in my sec- 
ond letter (page 12, &,c.), from Lord Temple's pamphlet. 

This transaction is particularly alluded to in letter 
3d by Junius in his Miscellaneous Letters, where he 
thus speaks of Lord Bute : ' It is worth while to con- 
sider, though perhaps not safe to point out, by what 
arts it hath been possible for him to maintain himself 
so long in power, and to screen himself from national 
justice. Some of them have been obvious enough ; 
the rest may without difhculty be guessed at. But what- 
ever they are, it is not a twelve-month ago, since they 
might have all been defeated, and the venomous spider 
itself caught and trampled on in its own webs. It was 
then his good fortune to corrupt one man, from whom 
we least of all expected so base an apostacy.* Who 
indeed could have suspected, that it should ever con- 
sist with the spirit or understanding of that person, to 
accept of a share of power under a pernicious court 
minion, whom he himself had affected to detest and 
despise, as much as he knew he was detested and 
despised by the whole nation? I will not censure him 
for the avarice of a pension, nor the melancholy am- 
bition of a title. These were objects which he 
perhaps looked up to, though the rest of the world 
thought them far beneath his acceptance. But, to 
become the stalking horse of a stallion, to shake hands 
with a Scotchman at the hazard of catching all his 

* The Earl of Chatham. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 



m 



infamy ; to fight under his auspices against the con- 
stitution ; and to receive the word from him, preroga- 
tive and a thistle ; (by the once respected name of 
Pitt!) it is even belov;^ contempt.' * 

The above letter is dated 24th June, 1767, a little 
short of di twelve-month after Lord Temple and Mr Pitt's 
meeting for the purpose of forming an administration ; 
when, disagreeing in their views, the interview was 
broken off by Lord Temple as already stated. The 
Duke of Grafton obtained the appointment of first 
Lord of the Treasury, which Lord Temple (as Junius 
observes), refused, with ' disdain.' Before Junius com- 
menced his Letters, Mr Pitt withdrew from the admin- 
istration, as Junius says, in disgust ; and he and Lord 
Temple became friends. I am, &lc. 



LETTER VI. 

Sir, 

Having in my former letters given little more than 
a general outline of the subject, I shall now ask your 
attention, more in detail, to the principal points of in- 
quiry, which must be understood, if we would arrive at 
any satisfactory conclusion in this investigation. Among 
these principal topics, the strong partiality of Junius for 
Mr George Grenville and his political measures, is one of 
the most conspicuous ; as will be abundantly evident by 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol. 2, p. 4C6. 



46 



LETTERS ON THE 



the following extracts from his letters at various periods, 
both before and after he wrote under his favorite name 
of Junius. 

In his letter of July 30, 1768, which briefly discusses 
the controversy with the American Colonies, he ar- 
raigns the ministry in his usual tone, for their pusillan- 
imity in not adopting measures of coercion towards the 
Americans, and in concealing from the public the real 
state of affairs in America, as well as justifying the 
Americans in their measures of resistance to the mother- 
country. ' Even after the combination of Boston,' he 
remarks, ' they would not suffer parliament to be in- 
formed of the real state of things in that province. They 
endeavored to conceal the most atrocious circum- 
stances ; and what they could not conceal they justified 

and when a paper, printed at Boston, was offered 

to the House, as containing matter of the highest im- 
portance for the information of parliament, the ministry 
would not suffer it to be read, because they knew it 
would be too bad to be passed over.' He then declares 
their motives for this conduct to be, ' such as weak and 
interested men usually act upon .... that they were 
determined to hazard even the ruin of their country, 
rather than furnish the man, who?n they feared and 
/m^pf/ [Mr Grenville], with the melancholy triumph of 
having truly foretold the consequences of their own 
misconduct. . . . They dreaded the acknoioledgment 
of his supcriurity over them, and the loss of their own 
authority and credit more, than the rebellion of near 

half the empire against the supreme legislature 

we are at this moment on the brink of a dreadful preci- 
pice; the question is whether we shall still submit to be 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 47 

guided by the hand which hath driven us to it, or 
whether loe shall folloio the patriot voice [Mr Grenville], 
which has not ceased to warn us of our dangers,' &lc. * 

With the same feehngs on the 15th December of that 
year, he addressed a complimentary and dignified, but 
not fulsome letter, directly to Mr Grenville himself; f 
and, in July following, he again adverts to ' the shrewd, 
inflexible judgment of Mr Grenville.' | 

So strongly marked is this attachment to Mr Grenville 
throughout, that the learned editor of Woodfall's edition 
of Junius with justice concludes — that ' of all the 
political characters of the day, Mr Grenville appears to 
have been our author's favorite ; no man was more 
open to censure in many parts of his conduct, but he 
is never censured; while on the contrary he is extolled 
wherever an opportunity offers.' § And in another 
place, the same editor says — ' the warm attachment of 
Junius to every part of the conduct of this distinguish- 
ed statesman may perhaps be conceived to import 
something more than a mere political concurrence of 
sentiment and to indicate an ardent personal friend- 
ship.' I! 

Upon the supposition that Lord Temple was the 
author of Junius, this is fully accounted for. There 
was, as the letters indicate, ' something more than a 
mere political concurrence of sentiment ' — there was, 
besides the ties of blood, ' an ardent personal friend- 

* Miscellaneous Letters, 29 ; Woodfall's Junius, vol. 3, pp. 
76-79. 
t Miscellaneous Letters, 53. X Junius' Letters, 15. 
§ Woodfall's Junius, Prelim. Essay, p. 81, note. 
II Woodfall's Junius; Miscellaneous Letters, 53, note. 



48 LETTERS ON THE 

ship/ which, with the very slight interruption already 
alluded to, continued through life. 

This warm attachment occasionally manifests itself 
both in direct, though tempered commendation of Mr 
Grenville, and in strong reprobation of those who were 
considered as the enemies of that gentleman, or had 
deserted, or been wanting in gratitude to him. Thus, 
in his 44th letter, dated April 22, 1771, in speaking 
of a distinguished character of the day, Mr Wedder- 
burne, whose severe but unjustifiable attack on Dr 
Franklin is familiar to every reader, Junius says — 
' To write for profit without taxing the press — to write 
for fame and to be unknown — to support the intrigues 
of faction and to be disowned as a dangerous auxiliary 
by every party in a kingdom, are contradictions which 
the minister must reconcile before I forfeit* my credit 
with the public. I may quit the service, but it would 
be absurd to suspect me of desertion. The reputation 
of these papers is an honorable pledge for my attach- 
ment to the people. To sacrifice a respected character 
and to renounce the esteem of societi/, requires more than 
Mr Wedderburne's resolution ; and, though in him it 
was rather a profession than a desertion of his princi- 
ples (I speak tenderly of this gentleman, for when 
treachery is in question, I think we should make allow- 
ances for a Scotchman), yet we have seen him in the 
House of Comn ons, overwhelmed with confusion, and 
almost bereft of his faculties.' On which the editor of 
Woodfall's Edition has this note : * Mr Wedderburne, 
progressively Baron Loughborough and Earl of Ross- 
lyn, had on the 12th of Jan. preceding the date of this 
letter, been promoted to the offices of Solicitor General 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 49 

and Cofferer to the queen. His politics may, there- 
fore, be ascertained without trouble ; yet he had been 
inducted into public life, under the auspices of George 
Grenville, after the latter had prof essed the principles 
of whiggism, and while he was a partisan of Lord 
Rockingham ; and it is to this defection from the ten- 
ets Mr Wedderburne avowed till this period, that our 
author here alludes.' 

The editor of Heron's Junius also observes on this 
letter — that Mr Wedderburne ' had taken a very active 
and zealous part against administration in the case of 
the Middlesex election. But George Grenville died on 
the 13th of November, 1770. His death proved fortu- 
nate to administration ; for it produced a defection of 
his principal adherents from the party of opposition, 
and thus broke its strength. Among the deserters upon 
this occasion, to the ministry, were the Earl of Suffolk, 
who obtained the appointment of Lord Privy Seal, and 
Mr Wedderhurne,^ &c. 

The writers of the above notes were not in posses- 
sion of the whole reason for Junius's severity towards 
those who were not of the whig party. For Lord Tem- 
ple had succeeded in bringing into his views, at this 
time, the great Lord Chatham, ' in whose imposing su- 
periority of ability Lord Bute found no dependence of 
security ; ' and he had, also, the adhesion of 'the shrewd, 
inflexible judgment of Mr Grenville,' If with such as 
these he succeeded, without being known to them as 
the author of Junius, we may not be surprised at the 
terrible vengeance, with which he visits the former 
satellites of those primaries, which had ceased to be suffi- 
5 



50 LETTERS ON THE 

ciently attractive to keep them revolving in what Junia? 
considered to be their proper sphere. 

The poHtical sentiments of Junius have been already 
mentioned, in general terms ; but to those persons, who 
have not a fresh recollection of his opinions, it may be 
proper to state them more in detail. From such a state- 
ment it will appear, that they were precisely those of 
Lord Temple. 

An able writer in the Edinburgh Review justly ob- 
serves — ' a simple test ascertains the political connex- 
ion of Junius — the only circumstance which he could 
not disguise, because it could not be concealed without 
defeating his general purpose. He supported the cause 
of authority against America — with Mr Grenville, who 
passed the Stamp Act. He maintained the highest 
popular principles on the Middlesex election — with the 
same statesman, who was the leader of opposition on 
that question. No other party in the kingdom but the 
Grenvilles combined those two opinions ; and it is very 
unlikely, that a private writer, unpledged and uncon- 
nected, should have spontaneously embraced political 
doctrines, which, though ingenuity might reconcile 
them in reasoning, were, in the disputes of that period, 

the opposite extremes.' He adds, that whoever 

revives the inquiry, therefore, should show his claimant 
' to be politically attached to the Grenville party ^ which 
Junius certainly was.' * 

After the historical facts before stated, it is unneces- 
sary to remark, that Lord Temple comes precisely within 
the conditions laid down by this reviewer ; and in res- 

* Edinburgh Review, vol. 44, page 5. 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 51 

pect to one of the great political questions above alluded 
to — the treatment of the Americans — I beg leave to 
refer you to a note in Heron's Junius, on the celebrated 
letter to the king. Junius says — ' The distance of the 
colonies would make it impossible for them to take an 
active concern in your affairs, if they were as well- 
afFected to your government, as they once pretended to 
be to your person,' &c. On the paragraph from which 
this passage is taken. Heron has the following note : ' it 
should seem, as if, in writing this paragraph, Junius 
felt himself at a loss, whether to be of the opinion of 
Mr Grenville, or that of Lord Chatham, in respect to 
the treatment of the Americans. He avoids the decla- 
ration of his sentiments ; but seems, from his compari- 
son of the Americans to the Scottish Presbyterians, to 
have inclined to the creed of George Grenville.' * 

On this note I would remark — that Junius was at a 
loss, as the writer supposes ; and this could have been 
the case with no other person than Lord Temple. This 
letter to the king is dated Dec. 19, 1769 ; in 1768, 
Lord Chatham resigned the seals, and afterwards was 
reconciled to Lord Temple. In November following. 
Lord Chatham did not attend during the session com- 
mencing as above. The next session opened the 9th 
of January, three weeks after the Letter to the King, 
when Lord Chatham made his appearance for the first 
time after his reconciliation with his brother. Lord 
Temple. 

But it will be said, by way of answer to the innu- 
merable well-established historical facts and circum- 

* Heron's Junius, vol. ii, page .59, note. 



52 LETTERS ON THE 

Stances which support Lord Temple's authorship, that 
Junius himself has declared in his letter to Sir Wm. 
Blackstone — 'It is not my design to enter into a for- 
mal vindication of Mr Grenville, upon his own princi- 
ples. I have neither the honor of being personally 
known to him, nor do I pretend to be completely mas- 
ter of all the facts.' Upon this the editor of Wood- 
fall's Junius says — ' this, as already observed in the 
preliminary essay, is a truly singular assertion when 
taken in connexion with the fact, that Mr Grenville, 
of all the political characters of the day, appears to 
have been our author's favorite. He voluntarily omits 
every opportunity of censuring him, and readily em- 
braces every occasion of defending and extolling his 
conduct and principles.' * 

Now it is to be observed, in the first place, that this 
declaration, of a party deeply interested, stands the soli- 
tary instance of any circumstance, which is at all in 
conflict with the supposition of Lord Temple's author- 
ship ; and, in the next place, to entitle this declaration 
to weight against all contrary evidence in the case, it 
must be assumed, that Junius never made any state- 
ment inconsistent with the existing circumstances of 
the moment. But this would be assuming too much, 
and what we know was not the fact. Like other wri- 
ters desirous of concealment, he sometimes found him- 
self under the necessity of resorting to expedients 
inconsistent with the general tenor of his language and 
conduct. We have it under Junius's own hand, that 
on one occasion he did request Mr Woodfall to dis- 

* Letter 18, vol. i, page 533, Woodfall's Edition. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 



b3 



avow, in cautious or equivocating language, a letter 
which was actually written by him and published under 
his proper signature. He says to Mr Woodfall — ' the 
last letter you printed was idle and improper, and, I 
assure you, printed against my own opinion. The 
truth is, there are people about me, whom I would wish 
not to contradict, and who had rather see Junius in the 
papers ever so improperly, than not at all. I wish it 
could be recalled. Suppose you were to say — we have 
some reason to suspect that the last letter signed Junius 
in this paper icas not ivritten hy the real Junius, though 
the observation escaped us at the time ; or, if you can 
hit off anything yourself more plausible, you will much 
oblige me, but without a positive assertion.' * 

If, therefore, we are to understand his declaration, 
that he had not ' the honor of being personally known 
to Mr Grenville ' — as applied to himself in his in- 
dividual character, it must be considered as one of those 
feints or stratagems, to which anonymous writers are 
often obliged to resort in order to avoid discovery. In 
the case of Junius, that necessity was more urgent than 
in any instance of the kind ; the boldness of his attacks 
upon various individuals had actually placed his person- 
al safety in great hazard. In one of his letters, he says 
to Woodfall — ' I must be more cautious than ever. I 
am sure I should not survive a discovery three days.' t 
And in another, he says to Sir William Draper, who 
had challenged him to fight him — ' As to me, it is by 
no means necessary, that I should be exposed to the 

* Junius's Private Letters to Woodfall, Letter 8. 
t Ibid, Letter 41. 
5* 



54 LETTERS ON THE 

resentment of the worst and the most powerful men in 
this country, though I may be indifferent about yours. 
Though 1/ou would fight, there are others who would 
assassinate.' * 

But this declaration of Junius is not necessarily to 
be understood as applied to the author, personally ; he 
is speaking throughout, as a friend has suggested, in 
his assumed character of Junius ; and, as such, his 
declaration was, no doubt, strictly true. This explana- 
tion is supported by an anecdote in the WalpoUana, 
which I here transcribe. Walpole says — ' I was in- 
formed by Sir John Irwine, that one day when he was 
at Mr Grenville's, MrG. told Sir John, that he had that 
morning received a letter from Junius, saying, that 
he esteemed Mr Grenville, and might soon make him- 
self known to him.' 

Equally great difficulties lie in the way of those, who 
have supposed many other persons to have been the 
writers of Junius. As, for instance, those who have 
believed with Dr Parr, that Charles Lloyd, Secretary of 
Mr Grenville, was the author, have to encounter the ex- 
press declaration of Junius, that he was the ' sole deposi- 
tory ' of his secret, and that it should perish with him. 
The same difficulty exists in the argument of those, who 
assume that Junius employed Sir Philip Francis, or any 
other person, as his amanuensis ; for, if he did, he was 
equally guilty of falsifying, as in his declaration respect- 
ing Mr Grenville. All these different opinions may be 
seen in the learned Mr Barker's copious work ; as, at 
pages 29, 44, 110, 278, &.c. 

* Junius, Letter 25. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 55 

One of the writers quoted in Mr Barker's work, 
briefly considers the question, how far such declarations 
of Junius are to be considered as ' innocent and allowa- 
ble ;' and Mr B. himself, in a note, adopts the opinion that 
such acts do not ' merit the name of moral turpitude ; ' 
for which he gives us the authority of Paley, Burlama- 
qui, and other civilians. The venerable and learned 
Dr Parr also, without giving a direct opinion, seems to 
think them in some degree justifiable. He says — * Do 
not suppose, that I have forgotten the fact upon which 
you lay great stress. I have little or no hesitation in 
supposing, that, under all the circumstances of the 
case, and from motives of personal regard to George 
Grenville himself, his friend and his secretary would 
venture upon falsehood, and Woodfall, knowing the im- 
portance of such disavowal, would record, although he 
disbelieved it. Woodfall stated a fact, and left his 
readers to their own conclusion, and it was the wish, 
if not the duty, of Woodfall, to keep us in the dark.' * 

Upon the explanation above given, however, of the 
true meaning of Junius' declaration respecting Mr 
Grenville, it is unnecessary to settle this question of 
morals, even if it had any bearing on the point in dis- 
pute. Junius himself was fully aware of the difficult 
position of ' a man who honestly engages in a public 
cause ' — ' honor and honesty must not be renounced, 
although a thousand modes of right and wrong were 
to occupy the degrees of morality between Zeno and 
Epicurus.' I am, &c. 

* Barker's Letters, page 246. 



56 



LETTERS ON THE 



LETTER VII. 

Sir, 

The question considered in my last letter naturally 
directs our attention to Mr George Grenville ; of whose 
history, with a view to the present inquiry, it will 
be necessary to have more minute information than 
is generally to be found in those works, which give us 
an account of his public conduct. I beg leave to give 
you, in a very condensed form, such particulars as I 
have been able to collect on this head, and as will be of 
use in the present case. 

Mr George Grenville studied law, and was called to 
the bar ; but, under the patronage of his mother's broth- 
er, the Lord Cobham celebrated by Pope, introduced 
into the House of Commons. In parliament he acted 
with his elder brother (afterwards Lord Temple), with 
Mr Pitt, and Sir George Lyttleton. When Mr Pitt and 
Lord Temple retired abruptly from office in 1761, Mr 
Grenville was detained and persuaded to co-operate 
with his brother-in-law the Earl of Egremont, under the 
banners of Lord Bute. He became one of the Secre- 
taries of State in 1762 ; in 1763, first Lord of the Treas- 
ury. He was considered the author of the American 
Stamp Act, and of the first persecution of Mr Wilkes.* 
He first attached himself to the Tory party, in conse- 
quence of marrying the daughter of Sir W. Wynd- 
ham, the confidential friend of Bolingbroke, and father 

* Heron's Junius. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 57 

of Lord Egremont. He afterwards, however, became 
disgusted with Lord Bute ; and, upon his resignation, 
firmly attached himself to the party of Lord Rocking- 
ham ; the most pure and unmixed whig leader of his 
day, with whom also Lord Temple and Lord Chat- 
ham united themselves.* 

In 1761, Mr Onslow having resigned the chair of 
the House of Commons, Mr Grenville solicited to suc- 
ceed to that vacancy. He waited on the Duke of New- 
castle, first Lord of the Treasury, nominally Minister. 
The Duke asked him, if he had mentioned the matter 
to Lord Bute. Mr Grenville owned he had ; and added, 
that he had not only the king's approbation, with his 
majesty's assurance of the cabinet, but the approbation 
likewise of all his own family. The last part of this 
was undoubtedly a mistake, for the Duke of Newcastle 
was the first person who informed Lord Temple of Mr 
Grenville' s overtures. Lord Temple and Mr Pitt were 
exceedingly offended with their brother, for having 
made an application to Lord Bute, without first commu- 
nicating his intentions to either of them. From this 
moment Mr Grenville separated himself from all his 
family, and there subsisted the most hitter animosity be- 
tween them until the month of May, 1765. During 
that period Mr Grenville attached himself, first to Lord 
Bute, and afterwards to the Duke of Bedford.! 

When Mr Pitt and Lord Temple retired from the 
ministry, Mr George Grenville continued behind, very 

* Woodfall's Junius, Letter 15, note ; vol. i, page 507. 
t Almon's Anecdotes of Lord Chatham, vol. i, page 305. 



58 LETTERS ON THE 

much to the disappointment of Lord Temple. Mr Al- 
mon wrote a letter to Mr Grenville, which was publish- 
ed, and passed to the sixth edition. It was answered by 
Mr Charles Lloyd, private secretary to Mr Grenville.* 

In 1765 Lord Temple and his brother Mr Gren- 
ville became reconciled, through the mediation of friends 
of both parties ; who declared, that this reconciliation 
was no more than a family friendship, as brothers ; and 
on public principles, only as to measures in future. t 

When Mr Grenville was appointed Secretary of 
State, he was under the necessity of soliciting his 
brother, Lord Temple, to permit him to be re-elected 
for the town of Buckingham ; and upon his promotion 
to the Treasury, he repeated the same act of supplica- 
tion. His generous brother said, it would have been a 
disgrace to government to have seen the king's first 
minister a mendicant for a seat in parliament.| 

' The reconciliation being made, Mr Grenville, un- 
bosoming himself to his brother, related all the arts 
and clandestine steps of the favorite ; which, if possi- 
ble, increased his brother's ardor on every subsequent 
occasion he had to oppose Lord Bute.'§ 

This statement by Mr Almon, who says ' he received 
the most interesting part of these Anecdotes from Lord 
Temple, is important. It will be also kept in mind, 
that Mr Grenville and Lord Temple had become recon- 
ciled before the commencement of the Letters of Ju- 

* Account of Life of Alraon, London Magazine, 1806. 
t Almon's Anecdotes of Lord Chatham, page 415. 
X Almon's Anecdotes of Chatham, vol. i, page 377, note. 
§ Ibid, page 415. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 59 

nius, the first of which is dated 21st of January, 
1769; and that, notwithstanding Mr Grenville had 
belonged to the Tory party, and was also one of the 
first persecutors of Mr Wilkes, yet we find Junius who 
was the life of the Whig party, taking occasions to 
speak in the highest terms of the ' inflexible integrity 
of Mr Grenville,' and particularly to defend his charac- 
ter against the attacks of Sir Wm. Blackstone. 

Mr Grenville died November 13, 1770, long before 
Junius completed the series of his Letters. 

I am, &/C. 



LETTER VIII. 

Sir, 

We have seen the strong partiality of Junius for 
Mr George Grenville, and his agreement in opinion with 
him respecting the leading political measures of that 
day, even those upon which Mr Grenville differed from 
the party, whose cause Junius supported — the whig 
party. Junius, in opposition to their views, asserted the 
right of the British government to exercise the supreme 
power they claimed over the American Colonies ; so did 
Mr Grenville ; yet on the Middlesex election, Junius, 
in opposition to the claims of the same government, 
maintained the very highest popular principles, and Mr 
Grenville was the leading man upon the same side with 
him. Junius also, in direct opposition to the friends of 



60 LETTERS ON THE 

liberty, asserted the legality of impressing seamen ; he 
did it, however, with great apparent reluctance — as 
yielding to that paramount ' necessity ' which nothing 
can withstand ; and he makes claim to a charitable con- 
struction of his motives, by appealing to the examples 
of Lord Chatham and Lord Cambden, to whose con- 
duct (on the American question), he v/as willing to 
give the same candid interpretation. ' I too,' says he, 
' have a claim to the candid interpretation of my country, 
when I acknowledge an involuntary, compulsive assent 
to one very unpopular opinion [impressments]. I lament 
the unhappy necessity, whenever it arises, of providing 
for the safety of the State by a temporary invasion of 
the personal liberty of the subject .... But I never 
can doubt, that the community has a right to command, 

as well as to purchase, the service of its members 

Upon the whole, I never had a doubt about the strict 
right of pressing, until I heard that Lord Mansfield had 
applauded Lord Chatham for delivering something like 
this doctrine in the House of Lords. That considera- 
tion staggered me not a little. But, upon reflection, 
his conduct accounts naturally for itself. He knew the 
doctrine was unpopular, and was eager to fix it upon 
the man, who is the first object of his fear and detesta- 
tion. The cunning Scotchman never speaks truth 
without a fraudulent design.' * 

These opinions upon the most important questions of 
that day, sufficiently mark the politics of Junius ; while 
his steady support of Mr Grenville leaves no doubt of a 
personal as well as political attachment, which will in 

* Junius, Letter 59. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 61 

vain be sought for in any other individual than his 
brother, Lord Temple. 

This supposition will receive further confirmation 
from a more minute review, than has been given in my 
former letters, of the connexion between Lord Chat- 
ham and Lord Temple, and other members of the Gren- 
ville family ; to which I shall now advert. 

The character and relation which Lord Chatham 
bore to the transactions of that period, give importance 
to whatever Junius has said of him — particularly, the 
different opinions which Junius expressed at different 
times respecting him. I shall therefore bring together 
some of the most important circumstances of his life 
and of the most striking passages of Junius, particu- 
larly such as show the deep interest which Lord Tem- 
ple took in his defence, and in supporting that honora- 
ble reputation of his illustrious brother-in-law, which 
has descended to our time.* 

Lord Chatham, as Mr Pitt, came first into Parlia- 
ment, in February, 1735, for the borough of Old Sa- 
rum. Having five sisters and an elder brother, his for- 
tune was not very considerable ; his fi-iends, therefore, 
obtained for him a cornet's commission in the Blues, 
in addition to his income. This apparently trifling 
circumstance of the commission was attended with im- 
portant consequences. In parliament, Mr Pitt, Mr 
Richard Grenville {Earl Temple), and Mr, afterwards 
Lord Lyttleton, became associates, and for several 
years always sat together in the House of Commons. 

* This account of Lord Chatham is abridged from Almon s 
work. 



ba LETTERS ON THE 

Upon every question Mr Pitt divided with his friends 
against the minister (Sir Robert Walpole), who was so 
much irritated by this conduct, that he made no hesi- 
tation of dismissing him from his office of cornet, as 
he had frequently done in the cases of other military 
officers who excited his displeasure. But this vio- 
lent measure only increased Mr Pitt's consequence in 
the eyes of the public. 

In 1744, when a list of alterations was made out for 
the inferior departments of government, Mr Pitt was 
proposed for Secretary at War ; but when the king 
came to Mr Pitt's name, he gave an immediate and 
positive refusal to the whole list. In consequence of 
this, a general resignation was adopted ; including Mr 
George Grenville ; but in three days afterwards, they 
returned to office ; and in May following (1746), Mr 
Pitt was appointed Paymaster.* 

At the close of the session of Parliament in March, 
1752, the king went to Hanover ; and during his ab- 
sence there was a great deal of intriguing and nego- 
tiating amongst all parties. But in every one of these 
negotiations, Mr Pitt and the Grenvilles were totally 
omitted. He was not ignorant of the clandestine pro- 
jects of the ministerial and opposition parties ; but he 
despised them. He was further disappointed in 1754, 
in not obtaining the Seals of Secretary of State, which 
he had not indeed asked for, but had expected without 
asking. This disappointment, however, was in some de- 
gree palliated by making Mr George Grenville, Treasu- 

* Almon's Anecdotes, p. 147-151. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. V^ 

rerofthe Navy, he being at that time in the utmost inti- 
macy with Mr Pitt, who had become his relation, by having 
lately married his sister. But the next year (November 
20, 1755), Mr Pitt was dismissed from office, together 
with Mr Legge and George and James Grenville* It 
should seem, as a biographer observes, that the king 
had long since conceived a prejudice against him, and 
had felt, that Mr Pitt was originally forced upon him 
much against his inclination.f 

In 1756, the king felt himself under the necessity of 
calling again for his services, and accepted the terms 
proposed by him ; which were — that he should himself 
be Secretary of State, Lord Temple first Lord of the Ad- 
miralty, George Grenville, Treasurer of the Navy, 
James Grenville, a Lord of the Treasury, &/C. The 
king however was not reconciled to Mr Pitt. The cir- 
cumstance which offended his Majesty most was, 3Ir 
Pitfs refusal to support the army in Germany. In 
consequence of this, the king commanded Mr Pitt to 
resign, on the 5th of April, 1757 ; and Lord Temple 
was also turned out. But this measure was soon re- 
voked, and Mr Pitt and his friends again called into 
office. At an audience on that occasion it is related, 
that Mr Pitt said to the king — ' Sire, give me your 
confidence, and I will deserve it.' To which the king 
replied without hesitation — ' Deserve my confidence, 
and you shall have it.' And it is said, that Mr Pitt at 
last so won upon the king, that he was able to turn his 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. ii, pp. 181, 187, 205. 

t History of the Life of Win. Pitt, pp. 55, 80. Dublin, 1783. 



64 LETTERS ON THE 

very partialities in favor of Germany to the benefit of 
his country.* 

While the war was prosecuted with the greatest una- 
nimity and zeal at home and success abroad, the seeds 
were sown of those divisions which appeared soon after 
the accession of George the Third. The patronage of 
places was claimed by the Earl of Bute, who makes 
so prominent a figure in the Letters of Junius, and is 
so well known in the history of those times under the 
name of The Favorite. On the dismissal of Mr Legge 
(March 19, 1761), Lord Bute was immediately ap- 
pointed Secretary of State. 

Mr Pitt now saw and felt the strength of the new 
king's party ; but he did not resign, because his grand 
object was Spain. He communicated to the cabinet 
his resolution of attacking Spain ; Lord Bute was the 
first person wlio opposed it ; he called it rash and unad- 
visable. Lord Temple supported Mr Pitt, which he 
had done uniformly from his coming into office ; and 
he and Mr Pitt, on the 18th of September, 1761, sub- 
mitted to his majesty their advice in writing, to recal 
the British ambassador, Lord Bristol, from Madrid. 
But after two different meetings of the cabinet, every 
other member of it declared against the measure ; upon 
which Mr Pitt and Lord Temple took their leave. In 
consequence of the rejection of their advice by the 
king, they resigned. 

' The most abandoned part of this business,' says 
Almon (who, it will be recollected, refers to Lord Tem- 
ple for the most interesting parts of his work), was in 

* Almon's Anecdotes, 218, &c, 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 65 

the House of Lords, on the commencement of the first 
session of the new parliament, November G, 1761 ; 
when Lord Temple said in the debate, that the written 
advice above-mentioned was not founded upon susjn- 

cion only but upon positive and authentic 

information of a treaty of alliance being signed between 
France and Spain. Upon which Lord Bute, icith as- 
tonishing and incredible ejfrontery, got up and pro- 
nounced these words : My Lords, I affirm upoji my 
honor y that there was NO intelligence of such a fact 
so constituted at that time.' This brought Lord Tem- 
ple up again, who affirmed also upon his honor, that 
there WAS intelligence of the highest moment : that 
he w^as not at liberty to publish that intelligence in the 
House, but would refresh his lordship's memory in pri- 
vate. He beckoned Lord Bute out of the House, and 
repeated to him the intelligence which had been laid 
before the cabinet. In this conference, Lord Bute 
found himself under the necessity of acknowledging, 
that he recollected something of it' * 

On the 5th of October, 1761, Mr Pitt resigned the 
Seals; and the same day Lord Temple also resigned 
his place. 

Immediately upon this, Mr Pitt was assailed with so 
much virulence, that he thought it proper to vindicate 
himself ; which he did in the letter I have given at 
large in a preceding communication ; f and he had 
the satisfaction of finding, in the course of three months, 
that Lord Bute himself was obliged to adopt the very 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. i, page 281, &c. 
t See pages 42, 43. 

6* 



66 LETTERS ON THE 

measure of declaring war against Spain, and under the 
disadvantages of all that delay which his opposition to Mr 
Pitt had caused. 

At this period an occurrence took place, which led 
to an entire separation, for a time, of Lord Chatham, 
and his brother-in-law, Lord Temple, from Mr George 
Grenville. It will be necessary to advert to it, in order 
to be possessed of the actual state of feeling among 
the members of the family, and to enable us to under- 
stand and apply the remarks which occur in Junius's 
Letters. 

It was understood that Mr Legge was to be turned 
out ; and Mr Grenville expressed to his brothers his 
desire to succeed him ; but Mr Pitt took no notice of 
his wishes ; upon which a coolness commenced between 
them. A particular account of the affair is given by 
Almon ; who, I beg leave to repeat, says he ' received 
the most interesting parts ' of his Anecdotes from Lord 
Temple himself He says — ' This disappointment 
occasioned Mr Grenville to direct his attention to an- 
other interest. Mr Onslow having resigned the chair 
of the House of Commons, Mr Gi-enville solicited to 
succeed to that vacancy. He was at this time treasurer 
of the navy, and had been in that post about seven 
years, and in other places. He waited upon the Duke 
of Newcastle, who being still first Lord of the Treasury, 
was nominally minister. The Duke asked him, if he 
had mentioned the matter to Lord Bute. Mr Grenville 
owned he had ; and added, that he had not only the 
king's approbation, with his Majesty's gracious assur- 
ance of the cabinet, hut the approbation likewise of all 
his own family. The last part of this assurance was 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. ' 67 

undoubtedly a mistake ; for the Duke of Newcastle was 
the first person wlio informed Lord Temple of Mr Gren- 
ville's overtures. Lord Temple and Mr Pitt were ex- 
ceedingly offended with their brother for having made 
an application to Lord Bute, without first communi- 
cating his intentions to either of them. From this 
moment 3Ir Grenville separated himself fi*om all his 
family ; and there subsisted the most hitter animosity 
between them until the month of May, 1765. During 
that period, Mr Grenville attached himself first to Lord 
Bute, and afterwards to the Duke of Bedford.' * 

Under this state of feeling it is not surprising that 
Mr Pitt, in the debate upon the bill for laying an excise 
upon cider and perry, should have indulged himself in 
a memorable sarcasm, even at the expense of his rela- 
tive, Mr Grenville. Mr Pitt strongly opposed the bill, 
as introducing the odious power of violating a man's 
dwelling-house, which was his castle. Mr Grenville, 
in his answer, contended that the tax was necessary, 
and asked why the right honorable gentleman did not 
tell where another could be laid instead of it ; repeat- 
ing, with a strong emphasis, two or three times, Tell 
me where you can lay another tax. Mr Pitt replied, in 
a musical tone. Gentle shepherd, tell me where ; and the 
whole House burst out into a fit of laughter, which 
continued some minutes. t 

The position, in which Lord Bute now found himself, 
with a divided cabinet, compelled him to retire from 
office, on the 8th of April, 1763, and made Mr Gren- 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. i, p. 305. 
t Ibid, p. 369. 



68 LETTERS ON THE 

ville his successor. In the following month of August^ 
however, he personally waited on Mr Pitt, with a view 
to forming a new administration ; but the project failed. 

On the 15th of November, 17(38, Parliament met ; 
and the case of Mr Wilkes's North Briton was the 
first subject of attention. The House of Commons 
immediately voted it to be a libel ; and Mr Wilkes 
made complaint of a breach of privilege. Mr Pitt, in 
that debate, disclaimed in the strongest terms, all con- 
nexion with the man who could be the author of such 
a publication — * It was true^ that he had friendships, 
and warm ones ; he had obligations, and great ones ; 
but no friendship, no obligations, could induce him to 
approve what he firmly condemned. It might be sup- 
posed he alluded to his noble relation (Lord Temple).* 
He was proud to call him his relation, he was his friend, 
his bosom friend, whose fidelity was as unshaken as his 
virtue. They went into office together, and they came 
out together ; they had lived together, and would die 
together. He knew nothing of any connexion with 
the writer of the libel. If there subsisted any, he was 
totally unacquainted with it.' t 

We are now arrived at a period, in the life of Mr Pitt, 
more immediately connected with the subject of Junius'& 
Letters ; and it will be necessary to attend more minute- 
ly to the dates of the various occurrences, that must be 
kept in mind, in order to establish the identity of Junius 
and Lord Temple, so far as it may be inferred fi-om the 

* Lord Temple was reputed to be one of the writers in the 
North Briton. Edit. 

t Alraon's Anecdotes, vol. i, p 397. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 0\f 

conduct of the latter towards his illustrious relative, as 
well as towards other individuals of rank and influence 
at this time. 

In the early part of the year 1765 the Earl of Bute, 
as it was alleged, had determined to effect a change of 
ministers.* His wish was, to bring Mr Pitt into office ; 
a project, which had failed in 1763, through his own 
cowardice. This year he resolved not to appear in the 
measure ; and the better to conceal himself and to give 
greater weight to his design, he put the negotiations 
into the hands of the Duke of Cumberland. 

Mr Pitt having declared in Parliament, that he would 
live and die with his brother (Lord Temple), the confi- 
dential contrivers of this second project to bring in Mr 
Pitt, resolved to apply to Lord Temple, which was con- 
sidered the most essential step towards gaining Mr Pitt. 
Accordingly on the 15th of May, 1765, the Duke of 
Cumberland sent for Lord Temple from Stowe, and also 
for Mr James Grenville. The Duke informed Lord Tem- 
ple, that the king had resolved to change his servants, 
and to engage his lordship, Mr Pitt, and their friends 
in his service ; but first he, the Duke, wished to know 
their conditions. Lord Temple stated — the making 
certain foreign alliances, the restoration of officers (civil 
and military) cruelly and unjustly dismissed, a repeal of 
the excise on cider, a total and full condemnation of 
general warrants and the seizure of papers. The Duke 
said these conditions must be agreed to; and then 

* This account of the affair is abridged from Almon's Anec- 
dotes, vol. 1, p. 411, &c. ; and it was probably furnished by 
Lord Temple, 



TO* LETTERS ON THE 

added, that he had a proposition to make — that it was 
the king's desire, that Lord Northumberland should be 
placed at the head of the treasury. Lord Temple 
replied, that ' he would never come into office under 
Lord Bute's lieutenant.' t Here the conference broke 
off. This proposition having been made in 1763, when 
Lord Bute appeared openly, left no room to doubt of 
his lordship's being still the secret m.over of the present 
case. 

On the 19th of May (1765), which was Sunday, the 
duke sent to Lord Temple, requesting him to meet him 
at Mr Pitt's house, at Hayes, in Kent. The duke was 
with Mr Pitt when his lordship came in, and had made 
the same proposition respecting Lord Northumberland, 
which Mr Pitt had refused as totally inadmissible ; upon 
the same principle, that the refusal had been made by 
Lord Temple — of which Mr Pitt had not, until that 
moment, received the smallest intimation. He assured 
the duke, that he was ready to go to St James's, if he 
could carry the Constitution along with him. 

The next day Lord Frederick Cavendish was sent to 
Mr Pitt, with an assurance, that the proposition respect- 
ing Lord Northumberland being at the head of the 
treasury was relinquished, provided his lordship was 
considered in some other way. Mr Pitt returned the 
same answer. Upon the return of Lord Frederick, the 
duke offered the treasury to Lord Lyttleton, who desired 
to consult Lord Temple and Mr Pitt. The duke was dis- 
pleased with this answer ; and, having immediately in- 

t Lord Northumberland was at this tirne Lord Lieutenant of 
Ireland, 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 71 

formed the king of the answers he had received, advised 
him to continue his present servants. 

It will be observed here, that at this same time, about 
May, 1765, (as observed in a former letter) Lord Tem- 
ple and his brother, Mr G. Grenville, became reconciled 
through the mediation of the friends of both parties ; 
Avho declared, that this reconciliation was no more than 
a family friendship as brothers; and on public prin- 
ciples, only as to measures in future. 

Among the consequences of this reconciliation was 
this, that Mr Grenville unbosomed himself to his brother, 
and related all the arts and clandestine steps which had 
been taken by Lord Bute. This, it is said, if possible, 
increased his brother's ardor on every subsequent occa- 
sion that he had to oppose the Favorite; and was 
doubtless one of the means, directly or indirectly, of 
Junius's obtaining that minute information, on points of 
secret history, which appears in his Letters. 

In consequence of this hostility to Lord Bute, the 
king himself undertook a new negotiation. He sent 
for Mr Pitt, who had an audience on the 20th of June, 
1765. The consequence of this was, the sending for 
Lord Temple; and on the 25th they waited on the 
king, when the following conditions were proposed to 
them : 

' 1. Mr Stuart Mackenzie to be restored. 

* 2. Lord Northumberland to be lord chamberlain. 

* 3. The king's friends to continue in their present sit- 
uations.' 

To the two first conditions Mr Pitt was not averse. 
Respecting the last he wished some explanation. But 
Lord Temple declared against the whole. Upon which 
the conference ended. 



72 LETTERS ON THE 

I add here a fact, stated in the work already quoted, 
that shows the high estimation in which Lord Temple 
was held by Mr Pitt, and the deference which that illus- 
trious statesman had for his opinions. The fact I allude 
to is this — that ' upon mature consideration Mr Pitt 
changed his sentiments on the two first conditions, and 
perfectly/ agreed with his brother.' * 

This negotiation of the king himself having failed, 
and his majesty having resolved to part with his present 
servants at any rate, the Duke of Cumberland was 
authorised to form an administration ; and the Duke of 
Newcastle, the Marquis of Rockingham, and their 
friends accepted the duke's invitation. 

Mr Pitt himself did not fully approve of the new 
ministry's acceptance; and Lord Temple condemned 
them in acrimonious terms ; alleging, that if they had 
followed the example of Mr Pitt and himself in refusing 
office, the Favorite would have been brought to their 
own terms, which would have excluded him and his 
friends from every situation of secret communication 
with the sovereign ; that now, his influence was only 
suspended. The new ministry, however, might have 
reasoned, that in the present unhappy partiality of the 
king, the constitutional exercise of the powers of gov- 
ernment was to be obtained by degrees, not by hazard- 
ing a violent convulsion of the state ; to which point 
some of them feared Lord Temple's inflexibility might 
possibly extend.! 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. 1, p. 418. 
t Ibid, vol. 1, p. 421. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 73 



LETTER IX. 

Sir, 

We ]iave seen, that thus far Lord Temple and Mr 
Pitt continued to be on terms of friendly intercourse ; 
and, with some differences of opinion on particular 
measures, may be said to have acted in concert. But 
this state of things was now about to be changed.* 

Parliament met on the 17th of December, 1765, but 
adjourned to the 14th of January, 1766. The new min- 
istry having an inclination to reverse the system of their 
predecessors. Lord Bute, who was its author, determined 
to effect their removal. He was no longer terrified by the 
threats of an impeachment ; and the Duke of Bedford 
had ceased to be an object of dread or respect. Lord 
Bute's attention was now directed to another nobleman. 
Since the reconciliation between Lord Temple and his 
brother, Mr Grenville, a coolness had commenced be- 
tween his lordship and 3Ir Pitt, and between his lord- 
ship and 3Ir James Grenville. They imagined from 
several circumstances, that their brother had supplanted 
them in his lordship's favor and confidence. 

To dissolve all great connexions had ever been Lord 
Bute's favorite maxim. Nothing, therefore, could be 
more fortunate for him than this family division. He 
resolved to seize the opportunity. Accordingly, a few 
days after the meeting of Parliament, when Mr Pitt 
had given the decision for the repeal of the American 

* This historical narrative is taken principally from the work 
just cited. 

7 



74 



LETTERS ON THE 



Stamp Act, lohich Mr Grenville had opposed^ Lord 
Bute solicited an interview with Lord Temple and Mr 
Grenville, in order to form a new administration. 

His first application was to Lord Eglintoun, between 
whom and Lord Temple there subsisted a very warm 
friendship. Lord Eglintoun opened his commission to 
Lord Temple at Lord Coventry's, where they dined on 
the first Sunday after the meeting of Parliament. The 
conversation began upon the affairs of America, in which 
the three lords agreed in opinion, that a repeal of the 
Stamp Act would be a surrender of the authority of the 
British legislature over the colonies. Lord Eglintoun 
finding that Lord Temple was of their opinion, said * let 
us talk no more upon that subject here, but let us go to 
your brother. Has your lordship received no message 
from him ? ' Lord Temple said he had not ; and in a few 
minutes after they went to Mr Grenville's. This mat- 
ter had been more explicitly opened to Mr Grenville, 
by Mr Cadogan (now Lord Cadogan), and Mr Gren- 
ville had requested Lord Suffolk to acquaint the Duke 
of Bedford with it. Upon seeing his brother, he instant- 
ly told him, without being asked a question, that an 
opening had been made to him. of an accommodation 
ivith Lord Bute, and that he wanted to consult his 
Lordship upon making the Duke of Bedford a party to 
the affair.' Lord Temple replied, that ' he might do as 
he pleased, hut that he himself would have no concern 
in the matter.' 

Thus ended Lord Bute's first attempt at turning to 
his advantage the family divisions of the Grenvilles, 
and bringing over Lord Temple to his views. But he 
w^s not discouraged ; he only changed his channel of 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. fS 

communication to another. This was Mr W. G. Ham- 
ilton, who was in the most confidential intimacy with 
his lordship, and who, fi-om the time of the separation 
of Mr James Grenville, was intended to be his Chan- 
cellor of the Exchequer, if ever he accepted of the 
Treasury. But Mr Hamilton, Tcnoicing Ms lordship's 
temper and resolution, with respect to Lord Bute, did 
not loarmly recommend the proposition. 

The next day (Monday), Lord Eglintoun went to Mr 
Grenville's to desire him to meet Lord Bute at his 
house ; but Mr Grenville was gone to the House of 
Commons; upon which Lord Eglintoun went there to 
him ; but meeting with Mr Stuart Mackenzie, he incau- 
tiously told him of the intended meeting, and that gen- 
tleman immediately informed Lord Holland ; who, see- 
ing Lord Bute, told his lordship, that ' he was going to 
do a very foolish thing ; but as he had gone so far he 
must not stop, but give them the meeting, hear what 
they had to propose, and then leave them. 

Lord Temple called upon his brother, just as he had 
returned from the House of Commons. In a minute 
or two afterwards. Lord Eglintoun came in, and, being 
rejoiced to see his lordship, begged he would stay there 
ten minutes, while he went home. Lord Temple said 
he could not stop so long, that he was going to the 
House of Lords upon particular business, and it was 
growing late. Lord Eglintoun then desired he would 
stay only five minutes. This was refused ; lastly he 
requested only three minutes, and this was refused also. 
But in the explanation it came out, that it was to meet 
Juord Bute, who. Lord Eglintoun supposed, was by this 
time waiting at his own house, and he wished to 



^6 LETTERS ON THE 

fetch him. At length, pressing the matter very earn* 
estly, Lord Temple answered warmly, ' By G — d I 
will not ' — that was his expression — and immediately 
stepped into his carriage. 

The Duke of Bedford and Mr Grenville met Lord 
Bute at Lord Eglintoun's, The conference was very 
short; Lord Bute followed Lord Holland's advice — he 
heard them — and then left them. He afterwards said 
to Lord Eglintoun, that he did not meet the psrson he 
wanted to meet (Lord Temple), but \he person he did not 
tvant to meet, the Duke of Bedford. Sometime after- 
wards Mr Pitt mentioned this meeting in the House of 
Commons. Mr Grenville did not deny it, but said that 
* the single proposition made, or point spoken of, was 
relative to the best means of preventing the intend- 
ed repeal of the Stamp Act. No other subject was 
mentioned.' 

Notwithstanding the ill success of this project, Lord 
Bute found means (as asserted by Almon), through one 
of the princess's confidants, to amuse Lord Temple 
with assurances, that a carte-hlanehe would in a very 
little time be offered to him ; and this manoeuvre was 
managed so well, he was completely duped hy it ; he 
believed the assurances for some time. The design was 
to engage him warmly in the opposition to the repeal 
of the Stamp Act ; and he fell into the snare. Having 
implicitly adopted the American politics of his brother ^ 
the American politics of the Court became an easy, and 
almost a natural gradation.* 

It now began to be evident, that notwithstanding the 
failure of these negotiations, yet the king still withheld 

* Anecdotes, vol. 2, p. C. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 77 

his confidence from his present servants. At this em- 
barrassing moment Mr Wilkes returned from France 
to London, and had some communications with the min- 
isters. A very curious and interesting account of this 
event and its accompanying circumstances is given 
by Almon, from the manuscript of Mr H. Cotes — the 
same person, it will be recollected, to whom Almon, in 
equivocal language, ascribes the Pamphlet of 1766, 
which I have had no hesitation in calling Lord Tem- 
ple's ; for, if he did not actually write it, with his own 
hand, he did, even according to Almon, communicate 
the ' particular facts ' stated in that account of the confer- 
ence and of the audience ; and I have no doubt that those 
* particular facts ' are generally stated in the very lan- 
guage of Lord Temple himself I am, &c. 



LETTER X. 
Sir, 

We now come to an event in the life of Mr Pitt, 
which had important consequences, so far as related to 
himself and Lord Temple, and not less important as 
respects our inquiry. 

In consequence of the opposition to the ministers, the 
king commissioned the chancellor, Lord Northington, 
to confer with Mr Pitt on the subject of a new arrange- 
ment. 

This negotiation was opened through the Duke of 
Grafton and Mr Calcraft. Mr Pitt was then at his new 
7* 



78 LETTERS ON THE 

estate in Somersetshire, which had been given to him 
on account of his high character for public virtue and 
great talents, by Sir William Pynsent, of Burton-Pyn- 
sent, a baronet of ancient family and a large fortune, 
who left no issue. This estate, which was near ^£3000 
pounds sterling a year, afterwards became the subject 
of contention in the law; and, as Almon says, this con- 
tention ' was countenanced from a quarter where, it 
might have been supposed, the perversion of justice 
never reached. However, it was of no avail ; the will 
was confirmed.' * This ' perversion of justice,' in the 
quarter alluded to, was probably one cause of the sever- 
ity of Junius towards Lord Mansfield and other emi- 
nent individuals who were supposed to have had an 
influence in controlling the administration of justice. 
But I return to the negotiation for a new ministry. 

Mr Pitt was immediately sent for, and arrived in 
London on the 11th of July, 1766; the same evening 
he had a conference with Lord Northington. 

The Duke of Grafton had lately resigned his office 
of Secretary of State, and attached himself to Mr 
Pitt ; and had publicly avowed this attachment in the 
House of Lords. He declared, it is said, that he had 
no objection to the persons or to the measures of the 

* Anecdotes, vol. 1, p. 407. It may not be uninteresting to 
the American reader, to know, that Thomas Holhs, wliose name 
is so well known to us as a friend of civil liberty, had an inten-' 
tion, as it is confidently asserted, of giving Mr Pitt a similar 
testimonial of his regard ; but he died before he was able to make 
the arrangement. He kept many workmen constantly employed 
in his service, and while giving directions on New Year's day, 
1774, he dropt down i:p. a fit and expired. Edit. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 79 

ministers he had recently left; but he thought they 
wanted strength and efficiency ; and that he knew but 
one man who could give them that strength and solid- 
ity — meaning 3Ir Pitt ; that under him he should be 
willing to serve in any capacity, not only as a general 
officer, but as a pioneer, and would take up a spade and 
a mattock. As soon as it was discovered, therefore, 
that Lord Rockingham's administration was not honored 
with the confidence of Mr Pitt, the Duke of Grafton 
and several other persons refused to give their support 
to it, Lord Rockingham's honor and integrity were 
not doubted ; and * it was admitted that his administra- 
tion had been regulated and conducted -on the purest 
principles of patriotism ; but there was not virtue 
enough in the country to support him.' * 

The negotiation now in question was not begun with 
Mr Pitt, under the immediate and personal direction of 
Lord Bute ; but his influence pervaded through a higher 
channel. Those, says Almon, ' who assert that Lord 
Bute loas not constilted, nor gave any advice upon this 
occasion, must forget all the preceding facts since the 
death of George the Second, and must deny his noctur- 
nal visits at this time, to the king's mother at Carlton 
House.' t 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. 2, p. 19. 

t Ibid, page 20. We insert here, from Almon's work, a most 
curious document, to show with what persevering and untiring 
vigilance every movement of Lord Bute was watched ; a vigi- 
lance, which exactly accords with that minute knowledge of 
secret history, which has always puzzled the writers upon the 
authorship of Junius. Who could have furnished such a docu- 
ment to Almon ? Could it have come from, any other source 



80 



LETTERS ON THE 



Lord Northington offered Mr Pitt a carte-hlanche ; 
but Mr Pitt wished to have it confirmed by the king 
himself, and was accordingly introduced to him at Rich- 
mond. The conference was short ; the king confirmed 
the offer of his chancellor, and added, that he had no 
terms to propose, but put himself into his, Mr Pitt's, 
hands. This was on Saturday, the 12th of July, 1766.* 
In the evening Mr Pitt had another conference with 

than Lord Temple ? It certainly rivals anything to be found in 
the history of espionage : 

' An eighteen days ' faithful Journal, ending a few days previous 
to the minister's shaking hands in the year 17C6. 

* Tuesday, June 24, 17G6. From Audley-street, the Favorite 
set out about one o'clock, in a post-coach and four, for Lord 
Litchfield's at Hampton Court, and came home again at ten at 
night ; went out directly after in a chair to Miss Vansittarf s , 
maid of honor to P. D. of W. in Sackville-street ; staid there but 
a very little while, and then went to Carlton-house, and returned 
home about twelve o'clock. 

' Wednesday 25. From Audley-street, the Favorite set out in 
a chair at half past six in the evening, went into Sackville- 
street as before, staid there till past ten, then went to Carlton- 
house, and returned home about twelve. 

* Thursday 26. From ditto, the Favorite set out at half past 
six in the evening in a chair, went into Sackville-street as be- 
fore, staid there till ten, then went to Carlton-house, and came 
home at twelve. 

* Friday 27. At seven this morning the Favorite set out from 
Audley-street, for his seat in Bedfordshire. 

* Sunday 29. The Earl returned from Bedfordshire this day 
to dinner ; set out as before at a quarter past six for Sackville- 

* The reader is here referred, by Almon, to the last three 
days, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, of the Eighteen Days ' 
Journal given in the above note ; and the reference deserves 
attention. Ed. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. SI 

the chancellor, and afterwards with General Conway, 
with whom he settled the principal arrangements. 
The next day, Sunday, the chancellor by his majesty's 
command sent for Lord Temple, then at Stowe, his 
residence in Buckinghamshire. He came to town on 
the 14th, and, the next morning waited upon the king 
at Richmond, hcfore he saw Mr Pitt. The king, after 
informing him of the offer made to Mr Pitt, added, that 

street, staid there till about ten, then went to Carlton-hoiise, and 
came home at twelve. 

' Monday 30. From Audley-street, the Favorite set out in a 
chair a quarter past six, went into Sackville street, staid there 
till about ten, then went to Carlton-houso, and came home as 
usual at twelve. 

' Tuesday, July 1. From ditto, at half past six, in a chair to 
Sackville-street, staid there till ten, then to Carlton-house, and 
thence home at twelve. 

* Wednesday 2. From ditto, ditto, ditto, and ditto. 

' Thursday 3. At six this morning, the Favorite set out from 
Audley-street for his seat in Bedforshire. 

*■ Saturday 5. The Favorite returned to Audley-street from 
ditto this day to dinner ; at half past six went to Sackville-street, 
staid there as usual till about ten, then to Carlton-house, and 
afterwards came home about twelve. 

' Sunday G. At half past six to Sackville-street as usual, 
about ten to Carlton-house, and home at twelve as before. 

' Monday 7. At three quarters past six to Sackville-street as 
usual, about ten to Carlton-house, and home at twelve. 

* Tuesday 8. At half past six to Sackville-street, about ten 
to Carlton-house, and home at twelve. 

' Wednesday 9. At half past six to Sackville-street, about 
ten to Carlton-house, and home at twelve. 

' Thtirsday 10. This morning at seven the Favorite and his 
lady set out from Audley-street for Bedfordshire. 

* Saturday 12. Returned this day from Bedfordshire to dinner, 
and, being Lord Mount Steuart's birth-day, he went out at eight 



82 LETTERS ON THE 

he expected his lordship would assist Mr Pitt in form- 
ing the arrangements. The next day, July 16th, Lord 
Temple received ' a very affectionate ' letter from Mr 
Pitt desiring to see him ; but, after an interview on the 
subject, as already stated from Lord Temple's pamphlet 
(in my second letter, p. 13), to which I would refer. 
Lord Temple was about breaking off the conference, 
because he found that he must submit to Mr Pitt's 
' dictation,' and was not to come in upon an equality 
with him, as he had expected. Mr Pitt, however, 
insisted upon continuing the conference ; but after 
various discussions as to the individuals who were to 
come into the administration. Lord Temple found his 
views still thwarted (as particularly stated in the letter 
just referred to), and that Mr Pitt still recurred to his 
first proposition, which was, as Lord Temple interpret- 
ed it, ' being sole and absolute dictator, to which no 
consideration should ever induce him to submit.' He 
therefore insisted upon ending the conference ; which 
he did with saying, that he thought himself ill-treated hy 
Mr Pitt, in not being allowed an equal share in the 
nomination. 

The extracts which I have given from Lord Temple's 
pamphlet do not mention his subsequent interview with 

this evening to Sackville-street, staid there till past ten, then 
went to Carl ton-house, and returned home about twelve. 

' Sunday 13. At half past six to Sackville-street, staid there 
till past ten, then to Carlton-house, and home at twelve. 

' Monday 14. At half past six to Sackville-street, staid there 
till ten, then to Carlton-house, staid there till past twelve, and 
then returned home. 

^ JV. B. The curtains of the chair from Jludley to Sackville-street 
ipere constantly drawn, and the chair taken into the house.' Editf 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 83 

the king. But it is necessary to advert to it ; and I 
therefore add here a short account of it, which appears 
to have been taken from another part of the pamphlet. 
I take it from Mr Almon's work : 

' Next day [July 17th] Lord Temple had an audience 
of the king in his closet, when his lordship told his 
majesty, in substance, " that Mr Pitt's terms were of 
such a nature, he could not possibly accept of them con- 
sistently with his honor ; that he had made a sacrifice 
of his brother [George Grenville] to Mr Pitt's resent- 
merit, in order to accommodate with him, but that gen- 
tleman insisted upon bringing in a set of men, some of 
whom were personal enemies to his lordship, and with 
whom he had differed upon the most essential points of 
government ; and would not permit Imn to name one. 
friend for the cabinet, in whom he had entire confi- 
dence ; and had assumed a power to himself to which 
his lordship never could submit — for if he did, the 
world would say, with great justice, that he went in 
like a child, to go out like a fool. That his wish was, 
to retrieve the honor of the nation by an administration 
formed upon a broad bottom, and composed of men of 
the best abilities, without respect to party, which his 
principal view was to extinguish; in order that the 
whole attention of parliament might be confined to the 
great objects of national concern. That he had never 
been a suitor to his majesty, either for himself or his 
fiiends, for any place of honor or emolument ; he did 
not even seek the present offer ; yet he was extremely 
willing to sacrifice his own peace and leisure, to the 
service of his majesty and the donnixy , provided he could 
do it with honor ; but that, he added, was in his own 



84 LETTERS ON THE 

disposal, and he loould not mahe a compliment of it to 
any man." 

' In the evening of the same day the noble lord told 
Lord Northington, that the farce was at an end and the 
masque was off; his lordship need not have sent for 
him from the country, for there 2vas no real wish or in- 
tention to have him in the administration.'' * 

I am, &LC. 



LETTER XI. 

Sir, 

We shall now begin to perceive the effects of this 
dissension between Lord Chatham and Lord Temple ; 
and, upon the supposition that the latter was the author 
of Junius, we obtain a satisfactory explanation of one of 
the greatest difficulties in this question — that is, the 
opposite feelings, of enmity and friendship, which Junius 
entertained towards Lord Chatham. It will be found, 
upon attending to dates, that these changes of feeling in 
Junius took place at periods, which agree exactly with 
the periods of hostility and reconciliation between Lord 
Chatham and Lord Temple. I proceed with the nar- 
ration of the facts. 

With feelings thus strongly excited, by the offensive 
conduct of Mr Pitt, Lord Temple returned to his resi- 
dence at Stowe. And though, according to Mr Almon, 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. 2, p. 27. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUxMIUS. 85 

his natural disposition was * the most amiable that can 
be conceived, to his friends,' yet, when ofFended, 'his 
disapprobation was warm and conspicuous ; his language 
jiowed spontaneously from his feelings ; his heart and 
his voice always corresponded ; and, with such a tem- 
per, it is not probable that the cause of his separation 
from Mr Pitt would either he concealed or indijferently 
expressed.' * The justness of this remark was abund- 
antly verified in the publications which must have come 
from his pen, previous to the regular series under the 
name of Junius. 

It will be necessary here to recur to dates. The 
separation between Lord Temple and Mr Pitt, it will be 
recollected, took place the 16th of July, 1766. The 
first attack upon Mr Pitt was the extraordinary publi- 
cation, which I have called Lord Temple's pamphlet ; 
it appeared immediately upon the open rupture between 
him and Mr Pitt, and was republished in the magazines 
for the month of August following. It is noticed by 
Lord Chesterfield as early as the 14th of August, in a 
letter to his son of that date. This called forth a reply, 
which Lord Chesterfield (in the letter just quoted) sup- 
poses was not written ' by Mr Pitt himself, but by some 
friend of his and under his sanction.' His lordship 
observes, that it gives an account of Mr Pitt's whole 
political life ; ' and in that respect, is tedious to those 
who were acquainted with it before.' ' But,' he adds, 
' at the latter end there is an article, that expresses such 

supreme contempt of Lord T , and in so pretty a 

manner, that I suspect it to be Mr Pitt's own ; you 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. 2, p. 27. 



86 LETTERS ON THE 

shall judge yourself, for I here transcribe the article : 
— " But this I will be bold to say, that had he (Lord 
T — — ) not fastened himself into Mr Pitt's train, and 
acquired thereby such an interest in that great man, he 
might have crept out of life with as little notice as he 
crept in ; and gone off with no other degree of credit, 
than that of adding a single unit to the Bills of Mor- 
tality." ' * 

This sarcasm, if it was then understood to be Lord 
Chatham's, must have had no little effect in still further 
irritating the fresh wound made by his separation from 
Lord Temple. 

The next publication against Lord Chatham followed 
this pamphlet, after an interval of a few months ; I allude 
to the first of Junius's Miscellaneous Letters, under the 
signature of Poplicola, dated the 28th of April, 1767, 
and which I have given at large in my fourth letter. t 
The perfect correspondence in matter and manner be- 
tween this and the pamphlet, particularly in the severity 
of the language, are too obvious to require any com- 
ment, and leaves no doubt that they were both from the 
same source. I cannot repeat here any parts of it, but 
beg leave to ask you to recur to the letter itself. In a 
letter of the following month, May 28th, 1767, under 
the same signature, he continues to show the same feel- 
ings towards Mr Pitt, then created Earl of Chatham. 
' I cannot admit,' says he, ' that because Mr Pitt was 
respected and honored a few years ago, the Earl of 
Chatham therefore deserves to be so now .... and I 
am inclined to think, that Mr C. D. will find but few 

* Chesterfield's Letters, No. 401. t Page 33. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 87 

people credulous enough to believe, that either Mr Pitt 
or Mr Pulteney, when they accepted a title, did not by 
that action, betray their friends^ their country, and, in 
every honorable sense, themselves Mr C. D. wil- 
fully misrepresents the cause of that censure which was 
very justly thrown upon Lord Chatham, when the ex- 
portation of corn was prohibited by proclamation. The 
measure itself was necessary .... but to maintain that 
the proclamation was legal .... was such a daring at- 
tack upon the constitution, as a free people ought never 
to forgive. The man who maintained those doctrines 
ought to have had the Tarpeian rock or a gibbet for his 
reward. .... The conduct of the Earl of Chatham and 
his miserable understrappers deserved nothing but con- 
tempt.' * 

Again, in a letter, signed Anti-Sejanus, Jr., dated 
June 24, 1767, he speaks of Lord Chatham's ' base 
apostacy ; ' and characterises his submission to Lord 
Bute — his ' shaking hands with a Scotchman, at the 
hazard of catching all his infamy, &c. as being ' below 
contempt.' t 

In a succeeding letter, dated 16th of September, 1767, 
Lord Chatham is depicted as ' a lunatic brandishing a 
crutch ; ' | and the same term is again applied to him in 
the tenth letter, dated the 19th of December of the 
same year. In this letter also, he contrasts with the 
' treachery ' and ' frantic fury ' of the ' high priest ' 
(Lord Chatham), the public virtue of Mr George Gren- 

• Junius's Miscellaneous Letters, No. 2 , vol. 2, p. 458-464. 
WoodfalVs ed. 

t Ibid, Letter 3, t Ibid, Letter 5, 



OO LETTERS ON THE 

ville — ' there was indeed one man, who wisely fore- 
saw every circumstance which has since happened, 
and who with a patriot's voice, opposed himself to the 
torrent.' 

The same feelings appear in other Miscellaneous 
Letters, to the beginning of the year 1768, and perhaps 
to a later date. After the autumn of 1768, when the 
reconciliation took place, as I have already stated (at 
pages 21 and 29), the tone of Junius towards Lord 
Chatham became entirely changed. But before refer- 
ring to the particular passages of Junius on this point, I 
will ask your attention to some of the intervening occur- 
rences relating to Lord Chatham, some of which must 
have had a tendency still farther to alienate Lord Tem- 
ple's feelings. 

Immediately after his separation from Lord Temple, 
having made choice of the office of Lord Privy Seal, 
he was made a peer, which was announced in the Lon- 
don Gazette, July 30, 1766. In the formation of his 
ministry he experienced many embarrassments. His 
biographer, Almon, states, that before he could make 
his final arrangements, he made several offers to differ- 
ent persons of great consideration, with a view to 
strengthen his ministry, and to detach them from their 
friends. But, he adds — ' that superiority of mind 
which had denied him the usual habits of intercourse 
with the world, gave an air of austerity to his manners, 
and precluded the policy of a convenient condescen- 
sion to the minutiae of politeness and fascinating powers 
of address. He made an offer of Secretary of State 
to Lord Gower, wliom he had refused^ when proposed for 
that office hy his brother , Lord Temple. He made 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 89 

offers to Lord Scarborough, Mr Dowdeswell and several 
others ; but in such terms of hauteur, as seemed to 
provoke, though unintentionally, the necessity of refusal. 
To the first, an abrupt message was sent — ' that he 
might have an office if he would ; ' to the second, ' that 
such an office was still vacant ; ' to a third, ' that he 
must take such an office or none.' The offers were all 
rejected. He then waited upon Lord Rockingham, at 
his house in Grosvenor Square ; but Lord R. refused to 
see him. 

" These circumstances,' continues Almoii, 'chagrined 
him considerably. He now found, for the first time in 
his life, that splendid talents alone were not sufficient 
to support the highest situations ; that the government 
of a party and the government of a nation, were as dis- 
tinct in their features as in their principles. He note 
felt the loss of his brother, Tuord Temple, whose gra- 
cious affability procured him the esteem of all ranks of 
people, while the splendour of his own talents com- 
manded their admiration. These tivo great men united 
made a host against the world ; but, when separated, 
they became the instruments of two factions; both of 
them without intending it, and for some time without 
perceiving it — Lord Chatham of the Court, and Lord 
Temple of the Opposition.' * 

Of all the circumstances adverse to Lord Chatham's 
views, he is said to have most regretted the loss of his 
brother, Lord Temple — ' he now felt the loss of a re- 
pository of his confidence, the solace of his hours of 
affliction. Grief, vexation, and disappointment, preyed 

* Ahnon's Anecdotes, vol. 2, p. 20, &c. 

8* 



90 



LETTERS ON THE 



upon his nerves ; which, though in early life naturally- 
strong, were now become weak by age and infirmity. 
His peerage had diminished his popularity ; a consider- 
able part of his ministry consisted of men, who had 
been appointed through necessity, not through choice ; 
his mind was sometimes vigorous and sometimes de- 
pressed — his ' body tortured by pain and imprisoned 
by infirmity — he fell into a paroxysm of the gout at 
Bath, which seemed to threaten his extinction;' and in 
the month of February, 1767, while on his way to Lon- 
don, he was obliged to stop on his journey till March, 
when he completed it; but he was in so feeble a state 
that he could not attend to business. 

I only add a remark or two further on the subject of 
his separation from Lord Temple. We have seen that 
this began on the 16th day of July, 1766, at the confer- 
ence held on that day respecting the formation of a 
new ministry. It continued from that time to the au- 
tumn of 1768. In one of the Miscellaneous Letters 
of Junius, Letter :35th, dated the 29th of August, 1768, 
after alluding to the other ministers, he thus speaks of 
Lord Chatham : 

' I think I have now named all the cabinet but the 
Earl of Chatham. His infirmities have forced him in- 
to retirement, where I presume he is ready to suffer, 
with a sullen submission, every insult and disgrace that 
can be heaped upon a miserable, decrepid, worn out 

old man He is indeed a compound of contradic' 

tions, but his letter to Sir Jetfery stands upon record. 
.... Lost as he is, he would not dare to contradict this 
letter. If he did, it would be something more than 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 91 

madness. The disorder must have quitted his head 
and fixed itself in his heart.' * 

Even at so late a date as the 19th of October, 1768, he 
appears to make an effort to repress his feelings of ani- 
mosity towards Lord Chatham : ' The Earl of Chatham 
— I had much to say, but it were inhuman to persecute, 
when Providence has marked out the example to man- 
kind.' Lord Chatham was at this time so severely 
tortured and worn away by the gout, that it was sup- 
posed he would never be able to resume an active part 
in politics. His lordship had resigned his post of Lord 
Privy Seal three days previous to the date of this letter, 
and was succeeded in that office on the 2d of Novem- 
ber following by the Earl of Bristol.t 

Now it appears from Almon's Anecdotes, that the 
reconciliation between Lord Chatham and Lord Tem- 
ple took place before the meeting of parliament, which 
was on the Sth of November, 1768; and upon compar- 

* Woodfall's Junius, vol. 3, p. 108. The reader will remark 
here the phrase * a compound of contradictions,' which is also 
adopted in Lord Temple's pamphlet of 1766. To understand the 
allusion here to Sir JefFery Amherst, it should be recollected 
that when Mr Pitt and Lord Temple were in the ministry, Mr 
Pitt gave as a reward, the government of Virginia to Sir JefFery 
Amherst, and in Mr Pitt's letter to him, solemnly pledged the 
royal faith that his residence should never be required ; it was 
given to him as a reward for his services for the conquest of 
Cape Breton. It was however taken from him at this time and 
given to Lord Botetourt, or rather given four days before it 
was taken from Sir J. Amherst. 

t Woodfall's Junius, Miscellaneous Letters. No. 48, vol. 3, 
p. 174. 



d3 LETTERS ON THE 

ing this date with those of the letters just quoted, it 
must probably have been effected between the 19th of 
October and the 8th of November. 

But it is not important to fix this with any greater 
precision for the purposes of the present argument. It 
is sufficient that we know, they were reconciled on or 
about the 21st of January, 1769, which is the date of 
the jirst Letter of the series under the signature of 
Junius. Now from the date of the rupture, July 16, 
1766, Junius, under different signatures, continued to 
lX)ur out his vengeance upon Lord Chatham, till late in 
the autumn of 1768 ; but when the series of the Letters 
of Junius wdiS begun, January 21st, 1769, this storm of 
invective abated ; and from that period Junius began 
* to like ' Lord Chatham, and continued to speak in 
commendation of him to the period of his final eulogy, 
which has been so much celebrated, and which 1 have 
already quoted from his letter to Mr Home, of the 13th 
of August, 1771 — being more than four years after his 
first attack upon him.* 

The first instance where mention is made of Lord 
Chatham after the reconciliation brought about by their 
mutual friend Mr Calcraft, and by the request of Lord 
Chatham, occurs in the Miscellaneous Letters, No. 51, 
dated the 14th of November, 1768. Your particular 
attention is requested to this point : for here we find, 
that only a few days after the 19th October Lord 
Chatham resigned, and a few days after he resigned, 
Lord Temple was reconciled and they were friends. 
On the 19th of October, as above remarked, Junius's 

* Junius's Letters. No. 54. 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 93 

severity against Lord Chatham had not relaxed; by the 
14th of November it had softened away, and we find 
no more invectives against him from that time. 

In the Miscellaneous Letter just referred to, Junius 
says — 'The name of Lord Chatham's administration 
was soon lost in that of the Duke of Grafton. His 
grace took the lead, and made himself answerable for 
the measures of a council, at which he was supposed to 
preside. He had gone as far as any man in support of 
Mr Pitt's doctrine. That parliament had no right to lay 
a tax upon America, for the sole purpose of raising a 
revenue. It was a doctrine on which Lord Chatham 
and the chancellor (Lord Camden) formed their ad- 
ministration, and his grace had concurred in it with all 
his sincerity. Yet the first act of his own administration 
was to impose that tax upon America, which has since 
thrown the whole continent into a flame. The meas- 
ures of the colonies are subversive of the constitution ; 
they manifest a disposition to throw off their depend- 
ance, and vigorous measures must be enforced at the 
point of the sword.' * 

'.There is the same apparent inconsistency,' says the 
late editor of Woodfall's Junius, 'in his being ultimate- 
ly the friend of Lord Camden, who is here [Miscella- 
neous Letters, April 5, 1768] held up to public odium, 
and to Lord Chatham, after having as warmly opposed 
him. But his change of opinion concerning these no- 
blemen was by no means a sudden flight ; it grew upon 
him slowly ; and was the result of their own change of 
conduct.' 

* Miscellaneous Letters, No. 51, 



9(1 LETTERS ON THE 

I may here call your attention to a remark made by 
the same editor, which shows a degree of inattention 
truly surprising. He observes, that the celebrated Let- 
ter of Junius to Lord Camden ' possesses the peculiar- 
ity of being the only encomiastic letter that ever fell 
from his pen under the signature of Junius.' * But 
what could with more propriety be called ' encomiastic ' 
in the fullest sense of the word, than the splendid eulo- 
gy on Lord Chatham just alluded to ? 

Lord Chatham had for some time determined to re- 
sign. The appointment of Lord Hillsborough Secretary 
of State for the Colonies, was such an outrage of his 
American System, and the achievement of Corsica by 
France was such an abandonment of his European 
policy, that they were the principal causes of his resig- 
nation. He did not go to Court when he resigned, but 
sent the Privy Seal by Lord Camden. This was the 
last place he held under the Crown.t I am, &c. 

* Woodfall's Junius, Prelim. Essay, p. 49, Lond. Ed. 
ii, p. 73. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 95 



LETTER XII. 

Sir, 

I have already mentioned, in general terms, the 
reconciliation which took place in the autumn of 1768 
between Lord Chatham and Lord Temple ; but it re- 
quires some further remarks, as connected with the 
authorship of Junius, and the subsequent public con- 
duct of the former. 

Lord Chatham, as before stated, had deeply lamented 
the difference between himself and his brother ; and 
being now freed from the cares of office, and the sus- 
picion of connexion with the court, he sought the friend- 
ship of his brother. Lord Temple, with anxiety and 
sincerity. He made Mr Calcraft his confidant. He 
confessed to him, that almost every body else had be- 
trayed him ; his brother had indeed abused him, but it 
was in the warmth of his temper, and in the openness 
of his nature, which was superior to all hypocrisy or 
concealment of disapprobation. Mr Calcraft approved 
himself a cordial and assiduous mediator. He accom- 
plished their reconciliation ; they had no more differ- 
ences afterwards ; and they were, if possible, more affec- 
tionately united than ever they had been. Mr Gren- 
ville perfectly acceded to the union.* 

The respite which Lord Chatham gave himself from 
all kinds of business, and the happiness he enjoyed in 

* Alraon, vol. ii, p. 85. 



9b LETTERS ON THE 

the reconciliation of his relations, contributed largely, 
it is said, to the restoration of his health. 

The next session of Parliament was opened on the 
9th of January, 1770. The discontents which pervaded 
the whole nation, stimulated him to the most vigorous 
exertion of his talents. 

A motion for an address was made. In Lord Chat- 
ham's speech on the address — ' He lamented the un- 
happy measure which had divided the colonies from the 
mother country. He owned his natural partiality for 
America .... That what he had heard of the com- 
binations in America, and of their success in supplying 
themselves with goods of their own manufacture, had 
indeed alarmed him much for the commercial interests 
of the mother country ; but he could not conceive in 
what sense they could be called illegal, much less, how 
a declaration of that House could remove the evil.' 

In answer to the speech of Lord Mansfield on the sub- 
ject of Wilkes's Election, Lord Chatham said : ' The 
Constitution of this country has been openly invaded in 
fact; and I have heard, with horror and astonishment, 
that very invasion defended upon principle.' 

The amendment proposed to the Address was nega- 
tived ; but in consequence of his strong and public 
arraignment of the ministry in this speech, several of 
them resigned. Lord Chatham's information^ of the 
Cabinet Council, was supposed to have been derived 
from Lord Camden, who, at the time, was Lord Chan- 
cellor, and he having this day divided with Lord Chat- 
ham, the Great Seal was immediately taken from him. 
Mr Yorke was prevailed upon by his majesty to accept 
the seal ; and in a few hours afterwards he put a period 
to his own existence. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 



9T 



The reader will recollect all along, that these are the 
times when Junius's Letters were being published ; and 
that he is incessantly pouring out the strongest invec- 
tives, as well as the most overpowering arguments, 
against the ministry. 

Notwithstanding the several resignations, some of 
them of the first families of the Kingdom, which took 
place at this time, — notwithstanding the general dis- 
satisfaction and ferment which prevailed throughout 
the nation — notwithstanding the recent and tragical 
death of Mr York — still the Court persevered in 
their measures.* 

On the 22d of May, 1770, the Marquis of Rocking- 
ham moved for fixing a day to take into consideration 
the state of the nation. 

The Marquis of Rockingham's speech was answered 
by the Duke of Grafton, to which Lord Chatham re- 
plied. 

The House fixed on the 24th of January for taking 
into consideration the state of the nation. But, there 
being no Lord Chancellor, adjourned to the second of 
February. On the twentyninth of January, four days 
previous to the next debate, the Duke of Grafton re- 
signed. Even this had no effect upon the Court. The 
Duke of Grafton's place was given to Lord North : he 
was now first Lord of the Treasury, Chancellor of the 
Exchequer, and Minister of the House of Commons. 

* The petitions from America, which followed soon afler 
those of the people of England, the Court still persevered 
against. But the Americans being further removed from the 
scene of corruption, were not debilitated by its poison. They 
retained the vigor and virtue of their ancestors. Mmon. 
9 



98 LETTERS ON THE 

Lord Chatham delivered a speech upon the Civil 
List and the dismission of Lord Camden. He said of 
Lord Camden : ' His integrity has made him once 
more a poor and private man ; he was dismissed for an 
opinion he gave in favor of the right of election in the 
people.' Here Lord Chatham was called to order. 
Some lords called out, to the Bar, to the Bar ! that 
Lord Chatham's words be taken down. Lord Chatham 
seconded the motion, and added, ' I neither deny,, re- 
tract, nor explain these words. I do re-affirm the fact, 
and I desire to meet the sense of this House ; I appeal 
to every Lord in the House, whether he has not the 
same conviction.' 

Lord Rockingham, Lord Temple , and many other 
Lords, did upon their honor affirm the same. 

It is an interesting circumstance to Americans in 
the history of this great man, that his disgust and indig- 
nation at the mismanagement of public affairs in Eng- 
land, excited in him a strong desire to end his days in 
America. In his speech on Lord C's motion for an 
address to the king to dissolve the parliament, he said, 
* That though no man prided himself more on his at- 
tachment to his native country, yet the proceedings of 
this people who called themselves its governors, had 
rendered it so disagreeable to him, that was he but ten 
years younger, he would spend the remainder of his 
days in a country (meaning America), which had al- 
ready given the most brilliant proofs of its independent 
spirit ; nor should my advanced age, continued he, even 
now prevent me, did not considerations of the last con- 
sequence, my bodily infirmities, interfere.' 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 90 

This anecdote of Lord Chatham's partiality for 
America, I may add, is evidence which is entirely con- 
sistent with the whole history of his conduct on the 
American question, and quite inconsistent with the feel- 
ings which Junius constantly expressed towards our 
country. It cannot for a moment be supposed, that 
Lord Chatham would, under a disguise, attack those 
very measures which in his public speeches and con- 
duct, he was desirous to carry into effect. 

The value of Lord Temple's friendship and co-ope- 
ration was justly estimated by Lord Chatham ; his 
opinions and personal services, while they were acting 
together, were of the utmost importance to his measures. 
It is truly extraordinary to see the opinions I have 
quoted from Lord Chesterfield in disparagement of the 
eminent talents of Lord Temple ; * while Lord Chat- 
ham, in parliament, pronounced him to be * one of the 
greatest characters ' the country had produced. Mr 
Wilkes, too, after praising Lord Chatham for his brilliant 
and successful public measures, in speaking of one of 
them which would have been of vital importance to 
England, but which Lord Chatham could not carry 
into execution — I allude to the proposed war against 
Spain — observes, that if the ' written advice ' had been 
followed, a very few weeks had then probably closed 
the last general war; although the merit of that advice 
was more the merit of his noble brother [Lord Temple] 
than his own.t 

* Page 8. 

t Junius's Miscellaneous Letters, No. 2, note. 



100 LETTERS ON THE 

Although Lord Chatham and Lord Temple enter- 
tained totally different opinions upon some of the poli- 
tical topics of that day, yet it is apparent that the latter 
had great influence over the former. As, for instance, 
on the question of triennial parliaments, which Junius 
strongly advocated. Lord Chatham said, in his reply 
to the Common Council of London in May, 1770, ' I 
am bound to declare that I cannot recommend triennial 
parliaments,* But he afterwards, April 30, 1771, came 
round to the opinion of Lord Temple; declaring him- 
self then to be ' « convert to ' triennial parliaments.' t 
Nor is this the only instance in which he first opposed 
and afterwards adopted the opinions of Lord Temple. 

Opinions to the same effect from many anonymous 
writers of that time, might be here brought together ; 
but they would, of course, be of little weight in com- 
parison with those whose authors we know. I shall 
give one, however, because it comes from no partial 
writer, and yet is entirely in accordance with what I 
believe every reader will be convinced was the fact, if 
he examines the subject with care and attention. It is 
from a pamphlet entitled — ' Contrast of Whigs and 
Tories examined,' extracts of which were published in 
a periodical of the year 1703. 

' With respect to my Lord Temyle, I shall only ob- 
serve, that as the ivar and his management of it, was 
the chief occasion of Mr Pitt's being so much distin- 
guished, so his intimate connexion with the gentleman 

* Woodfall's Junius, Letter 53, note. 

t Ibid., Letter 44, note. See also Parliamentary Debates of 
that period. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 



101 



abovenamed was, perhaps, the principal cause why this 
peer became so conspicuous and celebrated.' This 
opinion deserves the more attention, as the writer was 
evidently no friend to Lord Chatham or to Lord Tem- 
ple.* I add, in a note, as a subject of some interest, 
though not immediately relevant to the present question, 
a list of some of the great events of that war, which, 
under the ' management of Lord Temple,' was prose- 
cuted with such brilliant success.! 



* Gentleman's Magazine, 
t Places taken. 

Emden recovered from the 
French. — Senegal taken. 

Louisburg, Cape Breton, St 
Johns, Fort Frontenac, Fort 
Duquesne, Goree, Massulipa- 
tam, Guadaloupe, Marie- Ga- 
lante, Desirade, Niagara, Ti- 
conderoga, Sural, Crown Point 
Quebec, Montreal, and all Can- 
ada. 

Dumet, Dominique, Pondi- 
cherry, Belleisle, Martinique, 
Grenada, St Lucie, and the 
Havana ; though this last was 
after he resigned, yet it was in 
consequence of his plans. 

The French army defeated 
at Crevelt, and at Minden ; and 
all the French power in India 
destroyed. 



for August 17C3, p. 400. 
Shipping 
Destroyed at StMaloes' ; Ba- 
son and shipping destroyed at 
Cherburg. 

D'Ache's fleet defeated. 

Du Quesne's fleet taken. 

French fleet drove ashore at 
Rochfort by Admiral Hawke. 

Shipping destroyed at Havre. 

French fleet under De la 
Clue taken by Admiral Bos- 
cawen. 

French fleet completely de- 
feated at Quiberon bay. 

Thurot killed and his three 
frigates taken. 

At Bay of Chaleur ; frigates 
and stores destroyed. 

Add to these taken during 
the war, 44 ships of the line, 
61 frigates, 26 sloops of war — 
and her commerce and nine 
tenths of the royal navy des- 
troyed. 



9* 



102 LETTERS ON THE 

In the review we have taken we cannot but be struck 
with the remarkable fact, how exactly the various oc- 
currences in the political and private relations of Lord 
Chatham and Lord Temple, from time to time, corres- 
pond to the various changes in feelings and temper, 
which show themselves in regard to the former, through- 
out the letters written by Junius before and after he 
adopted that well-known name as his constant signa- 
ture. The results which I have thus obtained from a 
comparison of dates and circumstances made with 
much care and patience, have satisfied me, that Lord 
Temple must have been the author of the celebrated 
work in question. They have consequently at the same 
time, convinced me, that, notwithstanding the ingenious 
arguments which have been hitherto published by some 
writers. Lord Chatham himself could not have been the 
author. What will be produced by one of our own 
countrymen,* who is said to have an extensive work in 
the press in support of Lord Chatham's claims, I know 
not ; but I cannot yet bring myself to believe it possible 
for the most ingenious and subtle writer to give even 
plausibility to that supposition, if the reader will be at 
the trouble of comparing with it the irresistible argu- 
ments in support of the claims of Lord Temple. In- 
deed I cannot but say, that, so far as I have examined 
the question, the advocates of Lord Chatham have as 
great difficulties to contend with, as the advocates of 
some of the other claimants. While on the contrary, 
the hypothesis, that Lord Temple was the author, is 
attended with fewer difficulties than the case of any 

* Dr B. Waterhouse is the writer here alluded to. Edit. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 103 

Other individual ; indeed, as it strikes my mind, with 
no difficulties at all. I can truly affirm, that after the 
most patient study of the subject for many years, I am 
not able to discover any one circumstance of impor- 
tance, that is not perfectly consistent with his having 
been the writer. He had adequate motives for his in- 
quisitorial scrutiny of men and measures, and had tal- 
ents to make it with effect — while the peculiarities of 
his political relations serve to distinguish him from all 
other competitors, whose motives and ability might 
otherwise give them as strong a claim to the authorship. 

I am, &/C. 



LETTER XIII. 

Sir, 

After the very full consideration given in my preced- 
ing letters to the relation in which Lord Temple stood 
to Lord Chatham and Mr George Grenville, it will not 
be necessary to make so minute an examination in res- 
pect to some other individuals, who in their turns be- 
came the subject of Junius's letters. But if we pursue 
the inquiry in relation to those individuals, we shall 
still find everything consistent with the supposition of 
Lord Temple's being the author of Junius ; and, on 
the contrary, many circumstances wholly inconsistent 
with the claims of any other person. 



104 LETTERS ON THE 

Among those individuals with whom Junius thus 
came in contact, the Favorite, as he was called in the 
language of the day, that is, John Stuart, Earl of Bute, 
was one of the most obnoxious. 

This nobleman, in addition to his being a Scotchman, 
which of itself seems to have been enough to call down 
the wrath of Junius upon any man, was well known to 
have had a commanding influence over the late king, 
George the Third, who had then recently come to the 
throne. The tuition of the king, while prince, had 
been committed to Lord Bute. During the life of his 
grandfather, the prince had been brought up in a state 
of retirement, and was totally free from juvenile exces- 
ses. His filial, paternal, and other affections, were very 
strong. Those whom he loved, he loved fervently ; in 
that number was his tutor, the Earl of Bute* A bi- 
ographer of Lord Chatham says that the Earl of Bute's 
' temper was recluse and reserved. The sciences to 
which he was attached were those that consist in cold 
and minute investigation. He was hesitating, prevari- 
cating, and timid With that conceit of his 

own talents, which solitude is calculated to inspire, he 
formed no less a plan than to drive from the helm of 
affairs the most popular — I had almost said the ablest — 
minister by whom it was ever guided ; and to seize 
once for all the government of a mighty kingdom. He 
began by turning to account that dislike, which was in- 
sensibly gaining ground, to the Continental System. 
He carefully disseminated those principles, and held 
forth his pupil as the deliverer of England from so enor- 

* Bissett's History of George III, vol. i, cli. 1. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 105 

raous a burden. In the next place, he examined the 
materials of which the administration was composed. 
They were heterogeneous and dissimilar. Nothing but 
the predominant abilities of Mr Pitt had kept them to- 
gether for so long a time. Of the two leaders, Mr Fox 
had a personal animosity to the Secretary; and the 
Duke of Newcastle looked back with regret to the time 
in which he had so impotently wielded the government 
of his country without control. The path of the Fa- 
Torite was, in this case, obvious and easy. He entered 
into an intimate connexion with Mr Fox .... Of the 
Duke of Newcastle, weak and aspiring, he bought the 
assistance at a cheaper rate, by flattering the fond ex- 
pectations he had formed from the fall of his rival. 

' The influence of the Secretary was now sensibly de- 
iclining. One of the most striking symptoms, and which 
ought to have given him the most serious alarm, was 
'the dismission of his faithful associate, Mr Legge, from 
the superintendency of the finances. But, as he had 
always acted alone, and not enlisted 'himself in a party, 
so he seems never to have formed any violent attach- 
ments. He probably considered his influence as of a 
■species of its own, and necessarily uncontrollable. The 
-Earl of Bute was at the same time appointed Secretary 
of State with Mr Pitt.' 

At length, in one of his most important measures, 
his proposed anticipation of Spain in the declaration 
■of war before mentioned, Mr Pitt found himself suddenly 
and invincibly prevented. He found the whole of the 
council, with the single exception of Earl Temple, di- 
viding against him. It is said that this question was 
three times under discussion ; but Mr Pitt finding his 



106 LETTERS ON THE 

efforts unavailing, in consequence, as he and his friends 
beheved, of the influence of Lord Bate, resolved that 
this should be the last time he would sit in the council ; 
adding the memorable declaration which gave great 
offence — that he ' could not remain in a situation that 
made him responsible for measures which he was no 
longer allowed to guide J Lord Orford (Walpole), in 
one of his letters of that time, observes upon this — 
' He (Mr Pitt) and Lord Temple have declared against 
the whole cabinet council. Why, that they have done 
before now, and yet have acted with them again ; it is 
very true. But a little word has escaped Mr Pitt, which 
never entered into his former declarations ; nay, nor 
into Cromwell's, nor Hugh Capet's, nor Julius Caesar's, 
nor any reformer's of modern or ancient times. He 
has happened to say he will guide. Now, though the 
cabinet council are mighty willing to be guided when 
they cannot help it, yet they wish to have appearances 
saved ; they cannot be fond of being told that they are 
to be guided, still less that other people should be told 
so.'* 

The Earl of Bute soon afterwards became first Lord 
of the Treasury and the director of affairs. But the 
resignation of Mr Pitt, effected under such circum- 
stances, and the virulent attacks upon him, which were 
supposed to be patronised by Lord Bute, contributed to 
render this nobleman daily more unpopular. He was 
considered as an abettor of arbitrary power ; as hold- 
ing his office merely through favoritism, and as not 
entitled to it by his abilities, nor fitted for it by his prin- 

* Lord Orford's Tietters, 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 107 

ciples. This idea of his arbitrary notions of govern- 
ment was farther increased from the place of his origin 
and his name. He was a native of Scotland, where 
there had been many Jacobites — whence he was sup- 
posed to be a Jacobite himself — and as a Stuart, at- 
tached to the exiled family, at least to their political 
doctrines. In his administration, he had frequently 
removed Englishmen of known and respectable charac- 
ters, to make room for Scotchmen, who, however res- 
pectable, were not known, and were presumed to be 
the abettors of arbitrary power. Few ministers have 
been more generally hated than Lord Bute was by the 
English nation.* 

With regard to the present inquiry, there were, as 
we have seen, strong reasons for the personal antipathy 
of Lord Chatham and Lord Temple towards the Earl 
of Bute. It is justly observed in Heron's Junius (Notes 
On the Letter to the King), that there was this, among 
other reasons, for the dismissal of Mr Legge, which has 
been alluded to. * All whom Lord Bute could consult, 
whether whigs or tories, agreed in one common desire 
to see the pride of Pitt and the Grenvilles humbled, and 
to see them driven from office before they should be 
able to fortify themselves in it too strongly to be remov- 
ed. But they could not be abruptly dismissed, and 
were therefore to be first gradually weakened. Legge 
was the limb, which their party would, with the least 
shrinking, suffi3r to be lopped off. He had shewn him- 
self to be not absolutely incapable of betraying them, 
nor did he possess the v\ hole confidence of Mr Pitt.' t 

* Bissett's George IIL 

t Heron's Junius, vol. ii, page 49, note. 



108 LETTERS ON THE 

A conviction that Lord Bute had a settled determina- 
tion of thus humbling the family of which Lord Temple 
was the head, would alone have powerfully stimulated the 
party who was the object of the plan. But there were 
various other occurrences, which particularly operated 
to produce this effect in the mind of Lord Temple. I 
will ask your attention to some of the more striking 
ones. On the occasion I have already mentioned (at 
page 65), a personal dispute between them, upon the 
existence of certain intelligence, when Lord Bute de- 
clared in parliament, upon his honor, that there was no 
such intelligence, which Lord Temple, upon his honor 
also affirmed was received ; and he compelled Lord 
Bute to acknowledge that he * recollected something of 
it.' On another occasion, while the excise bill was 
pending in parliament, the city of London presented a 
petition to the House of Commons against it ; and 
moreover threatened to petition every branch of the 
legislature. Lord Bute was alarmed at the threat to 
present a petition to the king ; and Sir John Phillips, 
one of his confidants, assured the city committee, in 
Lord Bute's name, that if they would withhold their pe- 
tition to the king. Lord Bute would promise and engage 
upon his honor, that the act should be repealed the 
next year. One of the committee answered — ' Who 
can undertake for Lord Bute being minister next year, 
or for his influence over parliament V This attempt to 
operate upon the city committee being unsuccessful, 
another was made, at a private interview at Lord Bute's 
house, where the same promise was made to Sir James 
Hodges, town clerk of the city, who reported it to the 
city committee in Guildhall ; but they treated it with con- 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 109 

tempt. The petitions were accordingly presented to the 
Lords and to the king ; but without effect. The peti- 
tion to the House of Lords was presented by Lord Tem- 
ple, March 28th, 1763, and on the second reading of 
the bill, in the course of his speech he mentioned the 
above circumstance of Lord Bute's tampering ivith the 
city committee. Upon which Lord Bute got up and as- 
sured the House, that the whole was a factious lie. 
This assertion, as Almon observes, was not only too 
coarse but too strong to pass unnoticed. The corpora- 
tion of the city of London immediately instituted an in- 
quiry into the affair ; when Sir James Hodges, the town 
clerk, acquitted himself to the satisfaction of the whole 
court, by a candid and fair narration of the preceding 
facts ; and offered to make oath to them. From this 
inquiry, Almon adds, ' it was indisputably clear ivho teas 
the liar ; ' and he subjoins, as a note on this passage, 
the following remarkable ' Portrait,^ which is evidently 
intended for Lord Bute. Almon does not inform us 
who was the author of this ' portrait ; ' but the senti- 
ments in respect to Lord Bute, and the manner, bear a 
resemblance to Junius ; and, if it had not been the pro- 
duction of Lord Temple himself, I have a strong belief, 
that we should have had from his friend Almon some in- 
formation or conjectures as to its author. 

*A PORTRAIT, DRAWN IN THE YEAR 1776. 

' To draw a character so much beneath the honors of 
portraiture, would need apology, if the caprice of for- 
tune in a fit of ill humour against this nation, had not, 
by giving the original a situation for which Nature had 
never designed him, raised him into notice, and made 
10 



110 LETTERS ON THE 

him, in the consequences, an object of the public con- 
cern. It is only then for the most candid motive of a 
public utility, to atone for the ignobleness of the person- 
age whose portrait is here exhibited ; faithfully taken, 
feature by feature, without any the least caricature, and 
too fatally fulfilling the idea of a favorite without merit. 

' Constitutionally false, without system, and in the most 
capital points, greatly to his own disadvantage, so ; be- 
ing in fact neither true to others nor to himself: Involv- 
ed by the necessity of his nature, in that vicious circle 
of being false because weak, and weak because false. 

' Reserved, inward, and darksome ; sequestered in 
some measure from society, taking covert in the shades 
of embowered life, as the refuge of vanity from the 
wounds of contempt. Clandestine without concealment 
— sad without sorrow — domestic without familiarity — 
haughty without elevation ; nothing great, nothing noble 
having ever marked his character, or illustrated his 
conduct, public or private. Reducing everything to his 
own ideas, that standard of littleness, that mint of fal- 
sity. Stubborn without firmness, and ambitious with- 
out spirit. A frigid friend, a mean enemy. Nause- 
ously bloated with a stupid, rank, quality pride, without 
the air, the ease, the manners, the dignity of a gentleman. 
Ungenerous without any very extraordinary note of 
avarice ; but rather so through that poverty of head and 
heart, from which so many people of fortune hug them- 
selves on what they imagine saved by the omission of 
some little circumstance that honor, justice, or taste 
required of them, though by that little so saved they not 
only lose the much they will have sacrificed to their va- 
rious objects of vanity, but where they bespoke admira- 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. Ill 

tion find no returns for their expense but just censure 
and derision. And surely in this point of vulgar error, 
among the low understandings in high life, this poor 
man was not born to break herd. 

* Bookish without learning, in his library of parade as 
insensible and unconversable on the great objects of 
literature, as one deaf and dumb questioned on a con- 
cert of music ; as little of a judge as a blind man in a 
gallery of pictures. A dabbler in the fine arts, without 
grace, without taste. A traveller through countries 
without seeing them, and totally unacquainted with his 
own. 

* In a dull ungenial solitude, muddling away what 
leisure he may have from false politics, and ruinous 
counsels, in stuffing his portfolios with penny prints and 
pretty pictures of colored simples, those gazing-traps of 
simpletons, and garnishing his knicknackatory with me- 
chanical toys, baubles, and gimcracks, or varying his 
nonsense with little tricks of chemistry, while all these 
futile puerilities have been rendered still more futile by 
the gloom of a solemn visage, ridiculously exhibiting 
the preternatural character of a grave child. Baga- 
telles these, which it would doubtless be impertinent, 
illiberal, and even uncharitable to mention, were it not 
for the apprehension of his having inspired this most 
unroyal taste for trifles where it could not exist, but at 
the expense of a time and attention, of which the na- 
tion could not be robbed without capital detriment to 
it ; a circumstance this, that must draw down a ridicule 
upon his master, not to be easily shaken off, and as 
much more hurtful to a Prince than a calumny of a 
graver nature, as contempt is ever more fatal to govern- 
ment than even fear or hatred. 



112 LETTERS ON THE 

'Too unhappily, alas! for this nation, chance had 
thrown this egregious trifler into a family, whom his do- 
mestic straits had favorably disposed towards him. 
How he maintained and improved his footing into a 
pernicious ascendant, is surely beneath curiosity. So 
much, however, it would be unfair to suppress that the 
attack on the fame of his political maker,* was not only 
treated by him with such an apathy as had nothing in it 
of a just and noble contempt ; but to consummate the 
ingratitude, one of notoriously the first instigators of the 
scandal f was enrolled among his intimate confidants 
and supporters, without even this being the only appear- 
ance afforded by him of his not being infinitely displeas- 
ed at the currency of the calumny. 

' As to the royal pupil, who, by a much misplaced con- 
fidence, fell under his management at the tender age of 
susceptibility of all impressions, it was not well possible 
for him to prevent a deep-rooted partiality for a choice 
manifestly not made by him, but for him. In raw, un- 
experienced, unguarded youth, practised upon by an 
insidious study of his inclinations, not to rectify, but to 
govern him by them ; captivated by an unremitting at- 
tention to humor, and perpetuate the natural bent of 
that age to the lighter objects of amusement ; instituted 
to an implicit faith in the man who littered his head 
with trifles, and, unable to corrupt his heart, only har- 
dened it like his own against the remonstrances of true 
greatness, while warping his understanding with the 

* The writer of The Morth Briton, respecting the Princess 
Dowager of Wales. 

t Lord Talbot, who was made Lord Steward by Lord Bute, 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. . 113 

falsest notions of men and things, and especially of 
maxims of state, of which himself never had so much 
as an elementary idea ; thus delivered up to such a tu- 
tor, how could the disciple possibly escape such a combi- 
nation ? What of essentially wise or magnanimous 
could he learn from such a pedlar in politics and man- 
ners ? No one can impart what himself never had. 
Honor, gratitude, dignity of sentiment, energy of sin- 
cerity, comprehensiveness of views, were not in him to 
inculcate. Obstinacy, under the stale disguise of firm- 
ness ; the royalty of repairing a wrong by persisting in 
it, the plausible decencies of private life, the petty mo- 
ralities, the minutenesses of public arrangements, the 
preference of dark juggle, mystery, and low artifice, to 
the frank, open spirit of government ; the abundant 
sufficiency of the absence of great vices, to atone for 
the want of great virtues ; a contempt of reputation, 
and especially that execrable absurdity in the sovereign 
of a free people, the neglect of popularity ; were all 
that the hapless pupil could possibly learn from such a 
preceptor. Moulded by such an eternal tutorage, im- 
perceptibly formed not to govern, but to be governed ; 
and from being the lawful possessor of a great empire, 
converted into the being himself the property of a little 
silly subject ; stolen thus away from himself, what re- 
mains for us but ardently to pray that, before it is too 
late, he may be restored to himself; that he may at 
length enter into the genuine spirit of royalty, assume 
the part he v/as born to, and have a character of his 
own : May he quit a borrowed darkness for native light, 
never more to exhibit, in any the least degree, the copy 
of an original, whom not to resemble would surely be 
10* 



114 LETTERS ON THE 

the honor ! Let him give us the sovereign himself not 
the favorite at second hand, or what is still worse yet, 
the favorite's commis* at second hand ! And in this 
deprecation of detriment and dishonor to himself, there 
can questionless be nothing disloyal or disrespectful. 

' This testimony of a genuine sentiment takes birth 
too naturally from the subject with which it is connect- 
ed to appear a digression ; though in such a cause, and 
in such a crisis of the times, I should have judged even 
the digressiveness meritorious, and certainly alone the 
best apology for a portrait, the exhibition of which, 
from any motive of pique or personality, would be infi- 
nitely beneath the meanest of daubers. 

' Here it would be perfectly insignificant to search out 
the distinction, without a deference to the public, 
whether or not the favorite, after that scandalous deser- 
tion, when he as abjectly sneaked out of an ostensible 
office in the state, as he had arrogantly strutted into it, 
retains individually by himself, or by his appointment of 
others, the power of continuing that infernal chaos, into 
which he from the first plunged aff'airs, at the time that, 
through his cloudy imbecility, it- so soon thickened in 
the clear of the fairest horizon that ever tantalised a 
country with the promise of meridian splendour. It is 
enough to observe, that since his having delivered up, 
to his own parasites, that master whom he thus made 
the centre of their paltry cabals, and the prey of their 
sordid rapaciousness, it appears, at least from the iden- 
tity of spiritlessness, of insensibility to honor, of want 
of plan, and of the total disorder in which we see things 

* Charles Jenkinson. now Earl of Liverpool. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 115 

forever languishing, that the same destructive impulsion 
still subsists ; while none could collaterally be admitted 
into any participation of trust, but such as would wink 
hard, and at least pretend not to see through that gross 
illusion, with which a natural desire of not appearing 
to be governed, might blind a Prince, without imposing 
on any but himself The joke of holding committees 
with respective ministers of departments passes on no 
one. In vain would the master take blame upon him- 
self, and father errors not his own. The wires of mo- 
tion to the will have been too clumsily worked not to be 
seen, however they may not have been felt. Add, that 
the primary cause may, by the fairest investigation, be 
brought home to that unhappy man whom chance had 
thrown into a channel of power to do much good, or 
much mischief The last he has mechanically done, 
without, perhaps, much meaning it, coming upon the 
scene with absolutely everything in his favor, except 
himself All prejudice then apart, mark in him, to his 
Prince a tutor without knowledge, a minister without 
ability, a favorite without gratitude ; the very anti-ge- 
nius of politics ; the curse of Scotland ; the disgrace 
of his master ; the despair of the nation ; and the dis- 
dain of history.' 

In addition to the preceding circumstances, showing 
the extreme animosity of Lord Temple against Lord 
Bute, I beg leave to recal to your recollection some oth- 
ers which have been before alluded to in another con- 
nexion. On the occasion, for instance, when he was 
pressed by Lord Eglintoun to wait only five or even 
three minutes (as stated at page 75), as soon as he dis- 



116 LETTERS ON THE 

covered that it was for the purpose of having an inter- 
view with Lord Bute, he uttered himself in the vehe- 
ment language which has been already quoted (p. 76). 
At another time, when requested to take a i)lace in the 
ministry, as soon as he was informed that Lord North- 
umberland (then Lord Lieutenant of Leland), was in- 
tended for the head of the treasury, he declared that he 
would never come into office under Lord Bute's Lieu- 
tenant ; and the conference was thus broken off. Again, 
when overtures were made for an accommodation with 
Lord Bute, he in the most decided manner declared 
' he would have no concern in the matter.' And his 
confidential friend, Mr Hamilton, 'knowing his lord- 
ship's temper and resolution ivith respect to Lord Bute^ 
was unwilling warmly to recommend the measure (see 
p. 72). These feelings towards Lord Bute must have 
been not a little influenced by the belief, that notwith- 
standing all his caution and foresight, he was neverthe- 
less, according to Almon, at last ' completely duped ' 
by Lord Bute for some time, and fell into his snare.* 
If it were entirely correct, as here stated, that Lord 
Bute had completely duped him, he never could have 
sufficiently despised the act or its author. We cannot 
wonder, that the man who had so high a sense of honor 
as Lord Temple had, should not tamely put up with 
such a contemptible manccuvre, and which evinced such 
a total want of that manly virtue as Lord Bute had 
shown. Accordingly, the wrath of Junius against Lord 
Bute never abates ; and of his hypocrisy he has such a 
thorough detestation, that even he can hardly command 
language strong enough to express his feelings. 

I am, &LC. 

* Anecdotes, vol. ii, p. 6. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 117 



LETTER XIV. 

Sir, 

With such feehngs towards Lord Bute it is not 
strange that Lord Temple should have entertained the 
opinions expressed in Junius's letters of the royal pupil, 
whose heart and head had been under the guidance of 
such an instructer. The education of this prince, the 
first Englishman born, of the reigning family, had been 
a subject of great interest to the nation ; and the lead- 
ers of the different parties were extremely desirous to 
obtain an influence over him ; but the influence of Lord 
Bute, for the reasons before mentioned, overpowered all 
others. In Dodington's Diary, there is a very remark- 
able Memorial on the subject of the prince's education, 
purporting to come from several ' noblemen and gentle- 
men.' We are not informed who was the author of it; 
but I believe it must have been written by Lord Tem- 
ple ; as I shall endeavor to show presently, by bringing 
into one view, the situation of the Pitt and Grenville 
party at the time, and comparing their language with 
that of the Memorial. I was fully convinced of this 
on the first reading of it ; but I have since found some 
facts in support of this opinion. The memorial itself 
is so curious a paper, and is so intimately connected 
with the private history of these times, that I shall in- 
sert it at large. It is said to have been sent by the penny- 
post enclosed in a cover to General Hawley, on the 20th 
of December, 1752, and is referred to in Dodington's 
Diary (3d Edition, p. 200), which ' it will be recollected 



118 LETTERS ON THE 

was not published, when Junius wrote. The Memorial 
is as follows : — 

' X MEMORIAL OF SEVERAL NOBLEMEN AND GENTLEMEN OF THE 
FIRST RANK AND FORTUNE. 

* The Memorialists represent — That the education of 
a Prince of Wales is an object of the utmost importance 
to the whole nation ; that it ought always to be intrust- 
ed to noblemen of the most unblemished honor, and to 
Prelates of the most distinguished virtue, of the most 
accomplished learning, and of the most unsuspected 
principles, with regard to government both in Church 
and State. That the misfortunes which the nation for- 
merly suffered, or escaped, under King Charles I, King 
Charles II, and King James II, were owing to the bad 
education of those Princes, who were early initiated in 
maxims of arbitrary power. That for a faction to en- 
gross the education of a Prince of Wales to themselves, 
excluding men of probity and learning, is unwarranta- 
ole, dangerous and illegal : That to place men about 
the Prince of Wales, whose principles are suspected, 
and whose belief in the mysteries of our faith is doubt- 
ful, has the most mischievous tendency, and ought just- 
ly to alarm the friends of their country and of the Pro- 
testant succession : — That for a Minister to support 
low men, who were originally improper for the high 
trust to which they were advanced, after complaints 
made of dark suspicions, and unwarrantable methods 
made use of by such men in their plan of education, 
and to protect and countenance such men in their inso- 
lent and unheard of behaviour to their superiors, is a 
foundation for suspecting the worst designs in such a 
ministry, and ought to make all good men apprehen- 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 119 

sive of the ambition of these ministers : That it being 
notorious, that books inculcating the worst maxims of 
government, and defending the most avowed tyrannies, 
have been put into the hands of the Prince of Wales, 
it cannot but affect the memorialists with the most mel- 
ancholy apprehensions, when they find that the men 
who had the honesty and the resolution to complain of 
such astonishing methods of instructions, are driven 
away from court, and the men who have dared to teach 
such doctrine are continued in trust and favor : That 
the security of this government being built on Whig 
principles, and alone supported by Whig, zeal ; that the 
establishment of the present Royal Family being set- 
tled in the timely overthrow of Queen Anne's last min- 
istry, it cannot but alarm all true Whigs to hear of 
schoolmasters, of very contrary principles, being thought 
of for preceptors ; and to see none but the friends and 
pupils of the late Lord Bolingbroke entrusted with the 
education of a prince, whose family that very Lord en- 
deavored by his measures to exclude, and by his writ- 
ings to expel, from the throne of these kingdoms : That 
there being great reason to believe that a noble lord has 
accused one of the preceptors of Jacobitism, it is as- 
tonishing that no notice has been taken of a complaint of 
so high a nature : On the contrary, the accused person 
continues in the same trust, without any inquiry into 
the ground of the charge, or any steps taken by the 
accused to purge himself of a crime of so black a dye : 
That no satisfaction being given to the governor and 
preceptor, one of whom, though a nobleman of the 
most unblemished honor, and the other a prelate of the 
most unbiassed virtue, have been treated in the orrossest 



120 



LETTERS ON THE 



terms of abuse by a menial servant of the family, it is 
derogatory to his majesty's authority, under which they 
acted, is an affront to the Peerage^ and an outrage to 
the dignity of the Church* That whoever advised 
the refusal of an audience to the Bishop of Norwich, 
who was so justly alarmed at the wrong methods 
which he saw taken in the education of the Prince 
of Wales, is an enemy to his country, and can only 
mean at least to govern hy a faction which intends 
to overthrow the government and restore the exiled 
and arbitrary house of Steuart : That to have a Scots- 
man, of a most disaffected family, and allied in the 
nearest manner to the Pretender's first ministers, con- 
sulted in the education of the Prince of Wales, and 
entrusted with the most important secrets of govern- 
ment, must tend to alarm and disgust the friends of the 
present Royal Family, and to encourage the hopes and 
attempts of the Jacobites : Lastly, the memorialists 
cannot help remarking, that the three or four low, dark, 
suspected persons, are the only men whose station is 
fixed and permanent ; but that all the great offices and 
officers are so constantly varied and shuffled about, to 
the disgrace of this country, that the best persons ap- 

* ' An outrage to the dignity of the Church.' Memorial. 

' Outraged and oppressed as we are, &c.' * Are out- 
raged by an unwarrantable stretch of prerogative.' Junius, 1st 
Letter. 

Outraged — < This is a participle, from a noun violently forced 
to act the part of a verb. Its use is not very compatible with 
genuine purity and correctness of writing. It is sometimes, 
however, highly energetic and expressive.' 

iN'ote to Heron's Junius. 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 121 

prehend there is a settled design in these low and sus- 
pected people to infuse such jealousies, caprices, and 
fickleness, into the two ministers whose confidence they 
engross, as may render this government ridiculous and 
contemptible, and facilitate the revolution which the 
memorialists think they have but too much reason to 
fear is meditating. God preserve the King.' 

In addition to the general tone and manner of this 
memorial, which strongly resemble Junius, I think the 
following extracts from different sources, tend to cor- 
roborate the opinion that the author of Junius, who- 
ever he was, and the author of this Memorial, were the 
same person. They show, as indeed the whole history 
of the times demonstrates, a settled, unchangeable plan 
of Lord Bute, which he completely executed, to keep 
possession of the king ; and, as a necessary part of this 
plan, to destroy by every possible means, the influence 
of the GrenviUe family, of whom Lord Temple was the 
head, and probably most feared. It will be well here, 
as in former instances, to attend to dates. The Memo- 
rial was sent, it seems, by the penny-post, on the 20th 
of December, 1752. I now give some extracts. 

First, from Almon's Anecdotes of the Life of Lord 
Chatham. 

' March 30, 1752. The king went to Hanover ; dur- 
ing his majesty's absence, there was a great deal of in- 
triguing and negotiating among all parties. But in 
every one of these negotiations, 3Ir Pitt and the Gren- 

villes icere totally omitted Mr Pitt's weight of 

character in the House excited the jealousy of the prin- 
11 



122 LETTERS ON THE 

cipal persons in office. He treated the Duke of New- 
castle in such a manner, that if he had not dreaded 
him, he would have dismissed him ; for he held the 
post of Paymaster. The Duke complained of Mr 
Pitt's hauteur to his confidential friend, Mr Stone," who 
advised his Grace to overlook it, saying it ivo2ild he most 
prudent.' Vol. I, page 218. 

It must be remembered, that these anecdotes, as Mr 
Almon says, were principally supplied by Lord Tem- 
ple. The wary reply of Mr Stone, discovers the true 
Scotch character, as drawn by Junius. 

From Dodington's Diary : 

' December 5, 1752. Lord Harcourt resigned being 
governor to the Prince. He offered to do so, unless 
Mr Stone (placed as sub-governor by the minister), Mr 
Scott, tutor in the late princess' time, but recommended 
by Lord Bolingbroke, and Mr Cresset, made treasurer 
by the princess' recommendation, were removed. The 
king desired him to consider of it, but Lord Harcourt 
continuing in the same resolution, the Archbishop and 
Lord Chancellor, were sent to him to know the parti- 
culars of his complaints against these gentlemen. He 
replied that the particulars were nt only to be communi- 
cated to the king ; he waited on his majesty, which ended 
in his resignation. 

' Dec. 18. Lord Waldegrave declared governor to 
the Prince ; on 20th, sworn into office.' 

22d. 'I was with the Duke of Dorset. We talked 
over the affair of the prince's family, and agreed that 
there must be a counter story of the court side, or the 
REsiGNERS woidd run away loith the public opinion.' 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 123 

28. * I waited on the princess ; she was pleased to 
send the royal children to prayers, and to stay with me. 
She said there had been fine doings in our family ; there 
was such an outcry at two people leaving them, as if 
they were the most considerable men in the nation. 
That she knew nothing of Jacobitism being attempted 
or being instilled into the children. As for Lord Har- 
court, she had hardly seen him three times the whole 
summer ; the last time she saw him was at the birth- 
day ; he attempted to avoid her ; she got between the 
door and him, and took him by the coat (Nov. 27), and 
«aid it was very fine ; he said. Madam, it is all of the 
manufacture of Spitalfield, and so walked off. The 
Tuesday before he had been with the king to represent 
that her children were in the way of imbibing danger- 
ous notions, &/C. That he had no authority, and could 
do no good unless Stone, Cresset, and Scott, were dis- 
missed ; that they were Jacobites, &c., and had been 
bred so, and their families.' 

* I told the princess of Dr Newton, a popular preacher 
of St Giles's, having received an anonymous Letter, 
setting forth the dangerous way the Prince's education 
was left, putting it to him as a duty to take notice of it 
in the pulpit ; but I did not tell her of the anonymous 
Letter, which was sent to Gen. Hawley on the 20th 
Dec. ; it was a sort of remonstrance to the king from 
the whig nobility, setting forth the great concern for 
the Prince's education, that government was entirely 
trusted to two, one of which had the absolute direction 
of the Prince, and was of a Tory family, and bred in 
arbitrary principles, and the other who was bred a pro- 
fessed Jacobite, of a declared Jacobite family, whose 



124 LETTERS ON THE 

brother was now at Rome, was a favorite of the Pre- 
tender, and even his Secretary of State. In short, the 
corollary was, that Murray [Lord Mansfield, then Soli- 
citor General], and Stone governed this country. This 
letter was sent to Gen. Hawley, and by him handed to 
the Secretary of State. They very much intrigued to 
find out whence it came, and ivlio ivas the author.^ 

Page 200. 

Jan. 9, 1753. ' The Bishop of Peterborough made 
Preceptor to the Prince of Wales.' 

Feb. 8. ' The princess said to me, " there is a story 
about of the Bishop having said, that Murray, the So- 
licitor General, when he was first appointed, told him 
that Lord Harcourt was only a cypher ; that, as he (the 
Bishop) had parts and abilities, he might easily get the 
whole into his own hands ; at the same time advised 
him not to omit so fair an opportunity : that she be- 
lieved it a lie. But if true, the Bishop must he a had 
man, to hetr ay the private advice of a friendy This 
Dodington terms a very singular conversation. Page 212. 

Feh. 15. ' The cabinet met, and sat late, on the 
strange imputation of Bishop Johnson's, Messrs Stone 
and Murray being Jacobites, and having drank the 
Pretender's health, at Vernon's, the Linen-Draper, 
about twenty years ago.' 

March 3, 1753. ' The princess informed me that Mr 
Stone was determined to prosecute Mr Fosset for defa- 
mation ; his council was the Solicitor General and 
others.' 

6 'The Solicitor General informed me (Doding- 
ton), that he was brought in by implication only, that 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 



125 



Stone was principally meant and named by Lord Ror 
vensworth, from what Fosset had said to him in private 
conversation. The solicitor seems much alarmed at 
the prospect of the repeal of the Regency bill, and said 
all I said was true, and that they must act or he undone.^ 

Page 224. 

From Junius : 

' His (Lord Mansfield's) patron, whose health he once 
was so anxious for, is dead ; but the son of that unfor- 
tunate Prince survives, and I dare say, will be ready to 
receive him.' Letter 61, Philo-Junius. 

* Lord Chatham told me more than ten years ago, that 
he thought Murray [Lord Mansfield], the worst and 
most dangerous man in the kingdom.' Wilkes to Junius. 

Junius to the King. 

' It is not, however, too late to correct the errors of 
your education. We are still inclined to make an indul- 
gent allowance for the pernicious lessons you received 
in your youth. The plan of tutelage and future do- 
minion over the heir apparent, laid many years ago at 
Carlton-house between the princess dowager and her 
favorite, the Earl of Bute, was as gross and palpable as 
that which was concerted between Ann of Austria and 

Cardinal Mazarine, to govern Lewis XIV 'A 

little personal motive of pique and resentment was suffi- 
cient to remove the ablest servants of the crown.' Ju- 
nius. Note by Junius — ' One of the first acts of the 
present reign, was to dismiss Mr Legge, because he had 
refused to yield his interest in Hampshire to a Scotch- 
man, recommended by Lord Bute.' Note by Heron — 
* There was another reason for Mr Legge's dismissal. 
11* 



126 LETTERS ON THE 

All whom Bute could consult, agreed in the desire to 
see the pride of JPitt and the Grenvilles humbled. 
Legge was the limb which this party would, with the 
least shrinking, suffer to be lopped oif. He did not pos- 
sess their whole confidence.' Vol. ii, p. 49. 

Letter to the King, again : 

' Neither from America nor Ireland can your Majesty 
look for assistance- You are not, however, destitute 
of every appearance of support ; you have all the Jaco- 
bites, Non-jurors, Roman Catholics and Tories of this 
country ; and all Scotland without exception. Their 
zeal begins with hypocrisy, and must conclude in 
treachery. At first they deceive, at last they betray. As 
to the Scotch, I must suppose your heart and under- 
standing so biassed from your earliest infancy, in their 
favor, that nothing less than your own misfortune can 
undeceive you.' Heron's Junius, p. 61, 62. 

* The mistaken Prince, who looks for friendship, will 
find a favorite, and in that favorite the ruin of his 
affairs.' J^etter to the King, p. 70. 

Junius to Lord Mansfield — ' Permit me to begin 
with paying a just tribute to Scotch sincerity, wherever 
I find it. You had some original attachments, which 
you took every opportunity to acknowledge. The 
liberal spirit of youth prevailed over your native discre- 
tion. Your zeal in the cause of an unhappy prince was 
expressed with the sincerity of wine, and some of the 
solemnities of religion.' Note by Junius — ' This man 
was always a rank Jacobite. Lord Ravensivorth pro- 
duced the most satisfactory evidence of his having fre- 



AUTMORSttlP OF JUNIUS. 137 

quently drank the Pretender's health upon his knees.' 
Lord Mansfield's brother was confidential Secretary to 
the Pretender ; and Lord Mansfield, when Mr Murray, 
and Stone (who had been private secretary to the 
Duke of Newcastle), were appointed to an important 
trust in the education of our present king, when 
Prince of Wales.' Heron's Notes on Letter to Lord 
Mansfield. 

The circumstances above stated in relation to the 
king — his education under Lord Bute, and the entire 
surrender of himself to him, at least, as Lord Temple 
believed — and the continual hostility of Lord Bute to 
the Grenville family — undoubtedly produced their 
natural effect on the lofty spirit of Lord Temple ; and 
the royal pupil was thus obliged to share with his former 
tutor that indignation which, under other circumstances, 
might have been reserved for the devoted head of the 
minister only. Perhaps, too, the animosity of Lord 
Temple to the reigning family, might have begun in 
the time of the king's father, George the Second. In 
the memorable case of Admiral Byng, Lord Temple's 
independent conduct had excited the displeasure of the 
king. That Admiral's only fault, according to Almon, 
was * acting with too much prudence. He was sacri- 
ficed through the management of Lord Hardwick, to 
screen Lord Anson. When the court-martial was or- 
dered upon Admiral Byng, they contrived to have a 
certain Admiral at Portsmouth, upon whom they could 
rely, for President; had not Lord Temple, who was 
first Lord of the Admiralty, prevented it by placing 
Admiral Smith there, a senior officer. George the 



128 LETTERS ON THE 

Second had yielded to this manoeuvre against the un- 
fortunate admiral ; and he was highly offended with 
Lord Temple for defeating it."** 

These personal feelings, together with the general 
object of Lord Temple's party, the whigs, who hoped 
to force themselves into the administration, sufficiently 
account for the bitterness towards the sovereign, which 
is displayed in the celebrated Letter of Junius to the 
King, and for the publication of which, the printer, 
Woodfall, was prosecuted by the Attorney-General.t 

I am, &c. 

* Almon's Anecdotes, vol. i, p. 250. 

t It may be observed here, by the way, that the Letter to the 
King was in a different handwriting from the others of Junius ; 
Mr Butler, in his Reminiscences, describes it as ' a very regular, 
staid hand; no difference between the hair stroke and the body 
of the letters ; ' and a writer, quoted by Mr Barker, justly w^on- 
ders, that Mr Woodfall does not give afac-simile of it, as he has 
don© of other letters.' Barker's Letters- Preface, page xxiv. 

Editor. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 129 



LETTER XV. 

Sir, 

Among the celebrated men of the period when Ju- 
nius wrote, no one was more severely attacked by him 
than Lord Mansfield — and the question is often asked, 
what motive could Junius have for the severity of his 
language towards that eminent character. I answer — 
In the first place, his unconquerable antipathy to all 
Scotchmen, especially to those, who had any connexion 
with Lord Bute or his party. In the next place, the 
devotedness of Lord Mansfield to the Stuarts, especially 
the Pretender, whose health had been his favorite toast 
— the high tory principles, and political rancour of that 
Judge ; and the hatred which he believed him to enter- 
tain against Lord Chatham, his brother-in-law and po- 
litical colleague. He probably also attributed to Lord 
Mansfield the decision by which Mr Pitt, after a long 
contest in law, had lost, for a time, the Pynsent estate, 
which I have already mentioned, was given to him by 
Sir William Pynsent ; the decision, however, was after- 
wards reversed. But without going into too many de- 
tails, it will be sufficient to recollect, that Lord Temple, 
acting with Lord Chatham, would naturally have the 
same feelings towards their common adversary. Now 
Lord Chatham's hostility to Lord Mansfield is well 
known. In Junius's Correspondence with Wilkes, the 
latter says — ' Lord Chatham said to me ten years ago, 
ti ****** [Murray, Lord Mansfield], is the falsest hypo- 
crite in Europe," Lord Chatham's severity on Lord 



13d LETTERS ON THE 

Mansfield's legal opinions, in his speech upon the case 
of Wilkes, is well known to every one ; on which occa- 
sion Lord Camden united with Lord Chatham, and was 
in consequence dismissed from his office of Lord Chan- 
cellor. Without doubt the talents and influence of 
Lord Mansfield presented a formidable obstacle to the 
wishes of Lord Temple and his friends. 

The hostility of Junius to another eminent law char- 
acter, Sir William Blackstone, was comparatively un- 
important, for the influence of Sir William was com- 
paratively of little consequence as it respected the party 
operations of Junius's political friends. The doctrines, 
however, which Sir William maintained in the House 
of Commons in contradiction to those he had laid down 
in his celebrated Commentaries, on the case of Wilkes'e 
expulsion, gave Junius an opportunity, which he did not 
neglect, of pouring out upon him a portion of his ven- 
geance. His feelings, no doubt, were the more excited, 
as it was his own brother Mr George Grenville, who 
had come into collision with Sir William Blackstone, 
by quoting his Commentaries against him, which 
called forth some animadversions of Sir William upon 
Mr Grenville. Junius defends Mr Grenville, and car- 
ries the war into his adversary's camp with great ability 
and [severity — a severity which would be natural in 
the defence of a brother. It will be recollected, that 
Sir William at that time was Solicitor to the Q-ueen ; 
and it was of some importance, that the ministers should 
have his opinion in favor of the unconstitutional mea- 
sures they were about to take against Mr Wilkes. But 
he had no sooner expressed it, than he was utterly con- 
founded by Mr Grenville's quoting his book against him. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 131 

Junius says of this occurrence — * Doctor Blackstone, 
while he was speaking in the House of Commons, never 
once thought of his Commentaries, until the contradic- 
tion was unexpectedly urged, and stared him in the 
face. Instead of defending himself upon the spot, he 
sunk under the charge, in an agony of confusion and 
despair. It is well known, that there was a pause of 
some minutes in the house, from a general expectation 
that the Doctor would say something in his defence ; 
but it seems his faculties were too much overpower- 
ed to think of those subtleties and refinements, which 
have since occurred to him.'* Mr Grenville, after tri- 
umphantly quoting Dr Blackstone's book against the 
Doctor himself, paused for the Doctor's reply, and in- 
sultingly shook his head when he saw the Doctor re- 
main fearfully silent. The interruption of the debate, 
and the still, eager expectation of the House moved 
Sir Fletcher Norton to interpose. t ' It was then,' says 
Junius contemptuously, ' that Mr Grenville received the 
severe chastisement, which the Doctor mentions with 
so much triumph — I wish the honoi^ahlc gejitlemcm, in- 
stead of shaking his head, looidd shake a good argu- 
ment out of it. If to the elegance, novelty, and bitter- 
ness of this ingenious sarcasm, we add the natural 
melody of the amiable Sir Fletcher Norton's pipe, we 
shall not be surprised that Mr Grenville was unable to 
make him any reply.' But it is said in the note to 
Heron's Junius, that the words of his interposition, 
though contemptuously mentioned by Junius, were 
sufficiently facetious. 

* Junius, Letter 19. 

f Heron's Junius, vol. ii, page 209, note. 



132 LETTERS ON THE 

It may be added, that Sir Fletcher Norton, though 
afterwards Speaker of the House, sat at this time as a 
common member among the crown lawyers. It was to 
assist a brother, that he interposed against Mr Gren- 
ville. Mr Grenville had been bred a lawyer himself; 
and hence would naturally take a leading part in a 
question that was at once juridical and political.* 

Junius sums up his strictures on Doctor Blackstone, 
by imputing to him the most selfish and base motives 
and principles. He says — ' The Doctor recollected 
that he had a place Jo preserve, though he forgot that 
he had a reputation to lose. We have now the good 
fortune to understand the Doctor's principles as well as 
his writings. For the defence of truth, of law and 
reason, the Doctor's book may be safely consulted ; but 
whoever wishes to cheat a neighbor of his estate, or to 
rob a country of its rights, need make no scruple of 
consulting the Doctor himself f 

I cannot but observe, how strong an interest Junius, 
that is. Lord Temple, takes in every affair where the 
reputation or welfare of his brothers, Mr Grenville and 
Lord Chatham are concerned, and throws himself in 
to their aid as the occasion demands. 

Notwithstanding his severity on Doctor Blackstone, 
Heron says, ' of no lawyer is the reputation purer, or 
more truly illustrious, than that of Sir William Black- 
stone.' f 

His attack on Doctor Blackstone, however, was not 
for the sole purpose of defending his brother. His 

^ Heron's Junius, vol. ii, page 209, note. 

t Junius, Letter 14. 

t Heron's Junius, Letter 14, vol. i, page 153, note. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 133 

friendship for Mr Wilkes, who was his neighbor in the 
country, as will hereafter appear, and the general ob- 
jects of his party, called him forth in the present in- 
stance, T am, &c. 



LETTER XVI. 

Sir, 

At the close of my last letter I alluded to the cele- 
brated John Wilkes, as a friend of Lord Temple's. I 
beg leave now to ask your attention to some of the cir- 
cumstances relative to that individual, so conspicuous 
in the history of those times. And here, as on former 
occasions, it may be necessary to descend to particulars, 
which may become fatiguing ; but they cannot be dis- 
pensed with in an inquiry, of this nature. 

Mr Wilkes, it is well known, was a near neighbor 
of Lord Temple, in Buckinghamshire. Lord Temple 
was also his parliamentary patron, and by his influence 
Wilkes was chosen representative for Aylesbury. He 
had expectations too, of obtaining by means of his pat- 
ron some place under government ; but he was more 
than once disappointed in this, and ascribed his failure 
to the interference of Lord Bute. He connected him- 
self with Lord Temple as a political writer ; and they, 
together with Charles Churchill, were concerned in the 
celebrated work called The North Briton ; for the 
45th number of which Wilkes was persecuted, as has 
been before stated. But as soon as he was arrested on 
12 



134 LETTERS ON THE 

a ' general warrant/ he protested against its illegality ; 
and, upon the proceedings being declared to be illegal, 
he was discharged from confinement by Lord Chief 
Justice Pratt (Camden) amidst the acclamations of the 
audience and populace.* In the course of these pro- 
ceedings he was deprived of his commission as Colonel, 
by the king's order ; and his patron Lord Temple, lost 
his jjost of Lord Lieutenant of the county. This nor 
bleman, at his own expense, availed himself of the 

* As this proceeding is so prominent a fact in English history, 
and has had so important consequences to all who live under 
laws derived from England, it has been thought it would not be 
uninteresting to insert here a copy of the ' General Warrant' 
under which Mr Wilkes was taken. It is extracted from a 
pamphlet entitled, * An authentick Account of the Proceedings 
against John Wilkes, Esq., Member of Parliament for Ayles- 
bury, and late Colonel of the Buckinghamshire Militia ; con- 
taining all the Papers relative to this interesting affair, from that 
crentleman's being taken into custody by his Majesty's Messen- 
gers, to his Discharge at the Court of Common Pleas. With 
an abstract of that precious Jewel of an Englishman, the 
Habeas Corpus Act. Also, the North Briton, No. 45, being the 
Paper for which Mr Wilkes was sent to the Tower. Address- 
ed to all Lovers of Liberty.' — London, printed. Boston, re- 
printed, 1763. 

' On Saturday the Thirtieth of April [1763] at Ten in the 
Forenoon, three of his Majesty's messengers, by a warrant from 
the Secretary of State, seized on the Person of the said John 
Wilkes, Esq Manhcr of Parliament ; of which warrant the fol- 
lowing is a true copy. 

' George Montagu Dunk Earl of Halifax Viscount Sunbury 
and Baron Halifax one of the Lords of his Majesty's most hon- 
orable Privy Council Lieutenant General of his Majesty's 
Forces and Principal Secretary of State. 

' These are in his Majesty's Name to authorize and require 
you (taking a Constable to your assistance) to make strict and 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. IBS 

legal decision against general warrants, and commenced 
actions against the king's Messengers, the Secretaries, 
the under Secretary, and the Solicitor of the treasury ; 
in all which the prosecutors obtained damages, which 
were paid by the crown, in consequence of an express 
order of council. The doctrine of the illegality of 
such warrants, as we are informed by the historians of 
that time, was thus established ; and for this accession 
to the cause of liberty the public were indebted to John 
Wilkes, Lord Temple, and Lord Chief Justice Pratt, 
afterwards Lord Camden. 

Some further particulars, showing the close connex- 
ion subsisting between Lord Temple and Mr Wilkes, 

diligent search for the Authors Printers and Publishers of a 
-seditious and treasonable Paper intitled the North Briton Num- 
ber XLV Saturday April 23 1763 printed for G Kearsley in 
jLudgate Street London and them or any of them having found 
to apprehend and seize together with their papers and to bring 
in safe custody before me to be examined concerning the prem- 
ises and further dealt with according to law and in the due exe- 
cution thereof ail Mayors Sheriffs Justices of the Peace Con- 
stables and all other his Majesty's officers civil and military and 
!,oving subjects whom it may concern are to be aiding and assist- 
ing to you as there shall be occasion and for so doing this shall 
be your warrant. Given at St James' the twenty sixth day of 
April in the Third Year of his Majesty's Reign. 

Signed Dunk Halifax- 

Directed to 

Nathan Carrington John Money 

James Watson and Robert Blackmore 

Four of his Majesty's Messengers in ordinary.' 

' N, B. The Officers had a verbal order to put this warrant 
In execution, by entering forcibly into the house o? John Wilkes 
Esq; Member of Parliament, at midnight ; and those officers are 
(the hand bill says) now threatened with the loss of their places, 
for not complying with such verbal instructions/ 



136 LETTERS ON THE 

will not be uninteresting, and will at the same time, 
elucidate some parts of the letters of Junius relating to 
the latter. 

When Mr Wilkes was committed to the Tower his 
solicitor and one of his council went to consult with 
him about the means to be used for his enlargement ; 
but they were denied admittance. Major Ransford in- 
formed them, that he had received orders from the 
Secretary of State, not to admit any person whatsoever 
to speak with or see the said John Wilkes ; and further 
informed them that he had just before refused the 
Right Honourable the Earl of Temple such admittance. 

On the 4th of May, 1763, Lord Temple received 
from the Secretary of State (the Earl of Egremont) the 
following order to remove Wilkes from his office of Colo- 
nel in the Militia of Buckinghamshire : 

Whitehall, Maij 4, 1763. 
* My Lord, 

The King having judged it improper that John 
Wilkes, Esq. should any longer continue to be Colonel 
of the Militia for the county of Buckingham, I am 
commanded to signify his Majesty's Pleasure to your 
Lordship, that you do forthwith give the necessary Or- 
ders for displacing Mr Wilkes as an Officer in the 
Militia for the said county of Buckingham. 

I am, &/C. Egremont.' 

* To the Earl TempleJ 

The notice of this dismissal, as communicated by 
Lord Temple to Mr Wilkes, deserves attention ; and 
without doubt must have highly excited the displeasure 
of the king and his ministers. It is as follows : 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 187 

* Pali-Mall* May 5, 1763. 

*SlR, 

At my return last Night from the Tower, I received 
the enclosed Letter from the Earl of Egremont. In 
consequence of his Majesty's Commands therein signi- 
fied, you will please to observe that you no longer con- 
tinue Colonel of the Militia for the County of Buck- 
ingham. 

* I cannot, at the same time, help expressing the Con- 
cern I feel in the Loss of an Officer, by his deportment 
in Command, endeared to the whole Corps. 

I am, Sir, &c. Temple.' 

' To John Wilkes, Esq.' 

To this, Mr Wilkes made, as one of the pamphlets 
of that day expresses it, ' the following sensible and 
genteel answer : ' 

* Toioer, May 5, 1763. 
' My Lord, 

I have this moment the Honor of your Lordship's 
Letter, signifying His Majesty's Commands ihdl I sliould 
no longer continue Colonel of the Militia for the County 
of Buckingham. I have only to return your Lordship 
my warmest Thanks for the Spirit and Zeal you have 
shown in the Support of that Constitutional Measure 

* The author of ' Junius Unmasked,' who supposes Lord 
Sackville to have been Junius, observes, that ' one of the Letters 
of Junius had written upon it, near the signature, the words 
Pali-Mall, in which street, it is known, was the house of Lord 
Sackville.' But it is well known, and appears from the letter to 
Mr Wilkes inserted above, that Pall-Mali was also the town 
residence of Lord Temple. — Edit. 

12* 



138 



LETTERS ON THE 



from the very Beginning. Your Lordship will please 
to remember, that I was among the foremost who offer- 
ed their Services to their Country at that Crisis. Buck- 
inghamshire is sensible, and has always acknowledged, 
that no man hut your Lordship could have given Suc- 
cess to that Measure in our inland Country. I am proud 
of the Testimony your Lordship is pleased to give me, 
and am happy in these Days of Peace to leave so amia- 
ble a Corps in that perfect harmony which has from 
the Beginning subsisted. I have the honor to be, &,c. 

John Wilkes.' 
' To the Earl Temple: 

It is important to recollect, that soon after this corres- 
pondence with Wilkes, Lord Temple himself ivas re- 
moved from bei?ig Lord Lieutenant of the county of 
Buckingham. 

The intimacy between Lord Temple and Mr Wilkes 
corresponds with, and throws light upon, many things 
connected with the latter, which are mentioned or allud- 
ed to in the writings of Junius. In one of his letters 
to Mr Home (Tooke) — who, to my great surprise, has 
been considered by some writers iu England and our 
own country as the author himself — Junius says: 
* You say you are a man. Was it generous, was it 
manly, repeatedly to introduce into a newspaper the 
name of a young lady, with whom you must heretofore 
have lived on terms of politeness and good humor? — 
but I have done with you. In my opinion your credit 
is irrecoverably ruined.' We are told in a note to 
Woodfull's Junius, that Mr Home *had taken liberties 
with the name of Miss ^¥i1]ccs in his public letters in 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 1&9 

some of the newspapers — and liberties, which no mis- 
conduct of hers had entitled him to take.'* On which 
Mr Home in his reply observes — ' The terms of polite- 
ness and good humor, on which I am said to have lived 
heretofore with the young lady, are intended to confirm 
other paragraphs of Mr Wilkes, in which he is suppos- 
ed to have offended me by refusing his daughter. 
Ridiculous !' t 

I quote these passages, for the purpose of remarking, 
that Lord Temple, being a neighbor of Mr Wilkes 
in the country, would probably know more than Mr 
Home would be willing to admit respecting this young 
lady. It will be observed, that Mr Home does not deny 
the supposition of Junius, that Mr Wilkes had in fact 
refused him his daughter ; it was, therefore, probably 
true, and Lord Temple doubtless knew it to be so. 

Miss Wilkes is spoken of, in the notes to Junius, as 
an amiable and highly accomplished young lady. In 
the Private Correspondence of Junius and Wilkes, the 
former, when urging the latter to adopt a particular 
course of conduct in regard to the approaching elec- 
tion for London, says — ' I appeal to Miss Wilkes, 
whose judgment I hear highly recommended, would 
she think herself much indebted to her favorite ad- 
mirer, if he forced a most disagreeable partner upon 
her for a longr winter's ni^ht because he would not 
dance with her himself V 

Mr Wilkes in his reply observes — ' As a private per- 
son I figure to myself, that Junius is as amiable in the 
private, as he is great in the public walk of life. I now 
live very much at home, happy in the elegant society of 

* Letter 52. note. t Letter 53. 



140 LETTERS ON THE 

a sensible daughter, whom Junius has noticed in th« 
most obliging manner.' 

I will add, that in various instances Mr Wilkes fol- 
lowed the advice of Junius as to the political course he 
should pursue on important occasions. ' I wish to 
know,' says he at the close of one letter, * his (Junius's) 
sentiments about certain projects against the usurped 
powers of the House of Lords.' He says again, * I 
wish to comply with every direction of Junius, to profit 
by his hints, and to have the permission of writing to 
him on every important occasion.' 

' The business is too vast to write, too hazardous to 
communicate to an unknown person. Junius will for- 
give me. What can be done ? — Alas ! Where is the 
man, after all Wilkes has experienced, in whose friend- 
ly bosom he can repose his secret thoughts, his noble 
but most dangerous designs? The person most capable 
he can have no access to, and all others he will not 
trust, isole, as the French call it, a single column un- 
propped, and perhaps nodding to its fall.' — Junius 
answers : * I will assist you in any way that you will suf- 
fer yourself to be assisted. When you have satisfied 
your understanding, that there may be reasons why Ju- 
nius should attack the King, the Ministers, the Court of 
King's Bench and the House of Commons, in the way 
that I have done, and yet should desert, or betray the 
man who attacks the house of Lords, I would still 
appeal to your heart. Or, if you have any scruples 
about that kind of evidence, ask that amiable daughter 
whom you so implicitly confide in — Is it possible that 
Junius should hetrcnj me ?' * 

* Junius to Wilkes. Letter 31. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 141 

To a letter from George Onslow, Esq. to Mr Wilkes 
is the following Postscript: 'Postpone your judgment 
till you hear again from me, on what I lament as much 
as you can do, and think of as you do — Mr Pitt and 
Lord Temple's being not in employment.' See these 
two letters from Mr Onslow to Mr Wilkes ; they are 
certainly curious from the circumstance of having been 
furnished hy Junius for the printer of the Public Ad- 
vertiser.* 

But, notwithstanding this intimate acquaintance, we 
must conclude, that Mr Wilkes did not for some time, 
if at all, know who was the author of Junius, whatever 
suspicions he might have. He certainly avoided mak- 
ing known his suspicions, if he had any. In his letter 
of Sept. 12, 1771, he says — 'After the first letter of 
Junius to me, I did not go to Wood fall to pry into a 
secret I had no right to know. The letter itself bore 
the stamp of Jove. I was neither doubting nor imper- 
tinent.' t I am, &-C, 

* Miscellaneous Letters, No. G3. 

t Letters of Junius and Wilkes, No. 69. The editor is here 
reminded of a singularly curious fact, in corroboration of Lord 
Temple's authorship, related by Charles Butler, Esq., who was 
on terms of intimacy with Mr Wilkes. After mentioning his 
particular acquaintance with Mr Wilkes from the year 1776 to 
1784, and that Mr Wilkes himself disclaimed the authorship of 
Junius, treating that supposition with ridicule, Mr Butler says, 
he expressed a wish to see the original of Junius's Letters, and 
Mr Wilkes produced them to him. ' We more than once exam- 
ined them together with attention. All of them, except the Let- 
ter to the King, are, if I remember rightly, in the same hand- 
writing. It is like that which well educated ladies wrote about 
the beginning of the century ; a large open hand, regular, ap- 
proaching to the Italian. Mr Wilkes had a card of invitation 



142 LETTERS ON THE 



LETTER XVII. 

Sir, 

After the various well known facts which prove an 
intimacy between Lord Temple and Mr Wilkes, I was 
much surprised to find the opposite opinion maintained 
by Mr G. Coventry, a correspondent of Mr Barker's, as 
quoted at page 251 of Mr B's Letters. He says — ' In- 
deed the very circumstances of Grenville's death, so 
soon after the appearance of Junius, are not only quite 
sufficient to disprove Lloyd's claims altogether, but have 
always convinced me that Grenville's party had no share 
in the Letters. And now^ supposing the ridiculous 
idea that Lloyd continued to write under the auspices 
of Lord Temple, a different party still, how can we 
reconcile the circumstance with the fact, that Junius 
corresponded with Mr Wilkes so late as Jan. 15, 1772, 

to dinner /ro//t oW Lady Temple, mitten in her own hand; on 
comparing it with Junius's Letters, we thought there was some 
resemblance heticeen them. The Letter to the King was in a hand- 
writing perfectly different ; a very regular, staid hand ; no differ- 
ence between the hair -stroke and the body of the letters,' It may 
be further observed, that the supposition of some writers, that 
Junius's Letters were written in a feigned hand, is not warrant- 
ed by the fac-simihes published by Mr Woodfall. Those are in 
a natural hand and the hand of a female. The contrary suppo- 
sition is further supported by the Correspondence with Mr 
Woodfall ; for he requests Woodfall to have the letter for Gar- 
rick copied; giving as a reason — 'I would send the above to 
Garrick directly, but that I icould avoid having this hand too com- 
monly seen.' Private Letters to Woodfall, No. 4L This pas- 
sage is given by Woodfall in his fac-similies, plate 5. — Edit. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 143 

when it is well known, that no two persons could live 
on more hostile terms than Mr Wilkes and Lord 

Temple: (!) 

On the contrary, Mr Wilkes and Lord Temple were 
on very friendly terms during the time of Junius's let- 
ters ; the latter, in the person of Junius, took great in- 
terest in the affairs of Mr Wilkes, and succeeded in 
carrying him through triumphantly, and reinstating him 
in the good opinion of the nation at large ; the sen- 
tence against him in the House of Commons was erased 
from their records ; and Wilkes was elected Lord Mayor 
of London. All this, as it appears to me, was effected 
through the influence of Lord Temple. Yet in the 
face of the numerous facts existing in the case, respect- 
ing Mr Wilkes and other persons connected with Ju- 
nius, I find, to my surprise, that Lord Temple has 
been overlooked. A friend has lately shown me a letter 
from his correspondent in England, who had studied 
this question with attention, but who, when informed 
that I had shown Lord Temple to be Junius, observes, 
that the authorship of Lord Temple is ' out of the ques- 
tion: This I cannot but regard as the effect of pre- 
conceived opinions, influenced by the discussions, which 
have taken place in England and had a tendency to 
form partizans for particular authors. But in this coun- 
try we are free from the ill effects of those discussions ; 
and I confess, that I do not yet see how an unpreju- 
diced mind can, after an attentive consideration of the 
facts, avoid coming to the conclusion, that the author 
must have been Lord Temple, and no other. 

With respect to the acquaintance of Lord Temple 
and Mr Wilkes, not to say friendly feeling and interest 



144 LETTERS ON THE 

taken by the former in the latter, throughout the vicis- 
situdes of his eventful political career, I add the follow- 
ing : 

Junius, in Letter 9, to the Duke of Grafton writes — 
' I have frequently censured Mr Wilkes's conduct, yet 
your advocate reproaches me with having devoted my- 
self to the service of sedition. Your Grace can best 
inform us, for which of Mr Wilkes's good qualities you 
first honored him with your friendship, or how long it 
was before you discovered those bad ones in him, at 
which, it seems, your delicacy was offended. Remem- 
ber, my Lord, that you continued your connexion with 
Mr Wilkes long after he had been convicted of those 
crimes, which you have since taken so much pains to 
represent in the blackest colors of blasphemy and trea- 
son. How unlucky is it, that the first instance you 
have given us of a scrupulous regard to decorum is 
united with a breach of moral obligation ! For my 
own part, my Lord, I am proud to afHrm, that, if I had 
been v/eak enough to form such a friendship, / icauld 
never have been base enough to betray it. But, let Mr 
Wilkes's character be what it may, this at least is cer- 
tain, that, circumstanced as he is, with regard to the 

public, even his vices plead for him But the 

laws of England shall not be violated, even by your 
holy zeal to oppress a sinner ; and, though you have 
succeeded in making him a tool, you shall not make 
him a victim of your ambition.' 

The result proved, that Junius was as good as his 
word. The Memoirs of Wilkes also say, that he ever 
after contimied his attachment to his friend Lord Tem- 
ple, as long as he lived. 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 145 

In Junius's (Miscellaneous), Letter 18th, dated April, 
1768, he speaks in disapprobation of Mr Wilkes, and 
his conduct in loarm terms ; although subsequently and 
throughout the regular Letters of Junius, he supported 
the cause, in which Mr Wilkes was engaged. The 
reason of this I will give you in a note of Dr Mason 
Good's to Woodfall's edition of Junius. 

' It has already appeared in several instances, that 
Junius, subsequently to the present date, espoused the 
cause of Mr Wilkes, or rather strenuously upheld him 
in the contest with the ministry, upon the very subject 
adverted to in this letter. Yet the political conduct of 
Junius was perhaps strictly and unimpeachably uni- 
form. He had at the first, indeed, conceived a personal 
dislike to Mr Wilkes in consequence of his strenuous 
resistance to the general warrant, which was served 
upon him during the administration in which Mr George 
Grenville was Chancellor of the Exchequer, for whom 
whether in office, or out of office, Junius ever manifest- 
ed the strongest partiality. But in the present instance 
Wilkes is only adverted to as an instrument of attack 
upon the administration, which Junius abominated ; 
there is the same apparent inconsistency in his being 
ultimately the friend of Lord Camden, who is here held 
up to public odium, and to Lord Chatham, after having 
as warmly opposed him. ^But his change of opinion 
concerning these noblemen was by no means a sudden 
flight : it grew upon him slowly, and was the result of 
their own change of conduct.' 

In many points Dr Good seems to have perfectly un- 
derstood the character and connexions of Junius, his 
friendships and his enmities ; in fact sometimes he al- 
13 



146 LETTERS ON THE 

most points out the author. What here follows is from 
a very different source, Croly's Life and Times of 
George IV, just published. This writer devotes to the 
authorship of Junius about three pages of as crude and 
inconsistent guesses as could well be embodied in so 
short a space. He examines the claims of Sir Philip 
Francis, Burke, and Dunning ; and setting these aside, 
he goes on to say, that the marks of private Secretary- 
ship are so strong, that all the probable conjectures have 
pointed to writers under that relation, — Lloyd, private 
secretary to George Grenville ; Greatrakes, Lord Shel- 
burne's private secretary ; Rosenhagen, concerned in 
Shelburne House ; and Macauly Boyd, who was perpet- 
ually about public men, and went out with Lord Ma- 
cartny to India. He adds — But, mortifying as it may 
be to the disputants on the subject, the discovery is now 
beyond rational hope ; for Junius intimates his having 
been a spectator of parliamentary proceedings even 
further back than 1743 ; which, supposing him to be 
twenty years of age at the time, would give him more 
than a century for his experience the discov- 
ery would probably unmask the visage of some individu- 
al of political eminence, and giving us the amusing 
contrast of his real and his assumed physiognomy ; or, 

from unearthing some great unknown genius 

In the long interval since 1772, when the letters ceased, 

not the slightest clue has been discovered he 

gives us no insight into the purposes of government, of the 
councils of the cabinet he knows nothing (!)... That 
Junius will he found, if ever, among some of the hum- 
bier names of the list (!) If he had been a political 
leader, or, in any sense of the word, an independent 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 14'^ 

man, it is next to impossible that he should not have 
left some indication of his authorship.' Pages 128-30 

What a string of shrewd conjectures we have here, 
not only differing from the best informed writers on the 
subject, but differing from himself! It is also the more 
curious, as it is the latest commentary on the author- 
ship of Junius on the other side of the Atlantic. 

While this writer was upon the subject of ' private 
secretaryships ' he might have given us the following 
anecdote from Junius's Miscellaneous Letters, No. 85. 
Speaking of Mr Whately, private secretary of Mr 
George Grenvilie, Junius says — 

' Indeed Tom ! you have betrayed yourself too soon. 
Mr Grenvilie, your friend, your patron, your benefactor, 
who raised you from a depth (compared to which even 
Bradshaw's family stands on an eminence), was hardly 
cold in his grave, when you solicited the office of go- 
between to Lord North. You could not, in my eyes, 
be more contemptible, though you were convicted (as 
I dare say you might be), of having constantly betrayed 
him in his life time. Since I know your employment, 
be assured I shall watch you attentively .... Lord 
North, finding you cannot serve him, will give you noth- 
ing. From the other party you have just as much detes- 
tation to expect, as can be united with the profoundest 
contempt. Tom Whately, take care of yourself 

Who, but Lord Temple, would be likely thus to watch 
the movements of his brother, Mr Grenville's, private 
secretary, and to address him in the familiar style here 
adopted towards Whately ? 

Every reader of Junius will also recollect the confi- 
dence of Junius in Mr Wilkes, as manifested in his 



148 LETTERS ON THE 

Letters to Woodfall. He says — ' Shew the Dedica- 
tion and Preface to Mr Wilkes, and if he has any ma- 
terial objection, let me know.' Letter 40. And after- 
wards he says to Woodfall — ' When you see Mr W. 
pray return him my thanks for the trouble he has taken. 
I wish he had taken more.' Letter 57. Again, in an- 
other letter to Wilkes, Junius says — ' I love the cause 
independent of the person, and I wish well to 3Ir Wilkes 
independent of the cause.' Wilkes also, says to Junius 
— the business is too vast to write, too hazardous to 
communicate to an unTtnoivn person. Junius will for- 
give me.' To this, Lord Temple, intimate in Wilkes's 
family, makes the reply I have already noticed — 'Ask 
that amiable daughter whom you so implicitly confide 
in, Is it possible Junius should betray me.' 

I am, &c. 



LETTER XVII L 



Sir, 



In the preceding remarks upon the case of Mr 
Wilkes, I believe I have not mentioned the circum- 
stance, that Mr George Grenville had been one of the 
first of his persecutors, and was, of course, politically 
opposed to Mr Pitt, and at variance also with Lord 
Temple. But, during the time that Junius was writing, 
he was, as I have before stated, on friendly terms with 
Lord Temple, and remained so ever after. This state 
of feeling will be found to agree with that expressed by 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 149 

Junius in regard to Mr Grenville and Mr Wilkes ; 
though Junius cautiously avoids committing himself as 
a friend of the latter, and always distinguishes between 
Mr Wilkes, personally, and the cause with which he 
was identified. 

But the case of Mr Wilkes was further closely con- 
nected with another personage, who makes a conspicu- 
ous figure in the Letters of Junius. I allude to the 
Duke of Grafton — who, being the head of the cabinet, 
was treated as the responsible author of the most odious 
measures of the day — among which was the persecu- 
tion of Wilkes. This conduct of the Duke of Grafton 
towards Wilkes, his intimate friend, was held up to the 
execration of the public in Junius's most powerful man- 
ner. Dr Good in his notes to Woodfall's edition ob- 
serves — that 'Mr Wilkes, formerly, and before the 
Duke of Grafton had abandoned the party of Lord 
Chatham and had formed a party for himself, was one 
of his Grace's most confidential friends ; he was at this 
time confined in the King's Bench prison, having sur- 
rendered himself to the jurisdiction of the King's 
Bench Court, by which the sentence of outlawry had 
been pronounced against him. The immediate cause 
of the ministerial persecution of Wilkes, was the zeal 
with which he had opposed the existing cabinet, and 
especially the odium and disgrace, in which the ministry 
had involved themselves by issuing a general warranty 
to seize all the papers and persons of whomsoever they 
suspected to be concerned in writing the forty-fifth 
number of the famous political periodical paper called 
the North Briton, a joint publication of John Wilkes, 
Charles Churchill, and Lord Temple. The question 
13* 



150 LETTERS ON THE 

of generjil warrants was thereby necessarily brought 
before the public. The popular resentment was roused 
against the abettors of such measures to the highest 
point of irascibility ; and Wilkes, upon the next general 
election that ensued, was chosen member of Parliament 
for the county of Middlesex, notwithstanding his out- 
lawry, as a proof of the utter contempt in which the 
ministry were at this time held by the nation, rather 
than out of any personal regard for Wilkes.^ 

This last remark does not accord with the facts stat- 
ed by Junius, as to the public estimation in which Mr 
Wilkes was held. After boldly charging the Duke of 
Grafton with superseding the verdict of the jury, and 
the sentence of the law by pardoning M'Quirk, he 
adds, on the subject of Mr Wilkes — ' now, my Lord, 
let me ask your Grace, while you were withdrawing 
the desperate wretch [M'duirk] from that justice, 
which the laws had awarded, and which the whole peo- 
ple demanded against him, that there is another man 
[Wilkes] who is the favorite of his Country^ whose 
pardon would have been accepted with gratitude, 
whose pardon would have healed all our divisions ? 
Have you quite forgotten that this man was once Your 
Grace's friend ? Or is it to murderers only [M'Quirk] 
that you will extend the mercy of the crown V * 

Under this state of feeling for the cause itself, with 
which Mr Wilkes was identified, and, as I think too, 
from a degree of regard for him, as a personal and polit^ 
icalfriend. Lord Temple, under the disguise of Junius, 
opened his attack upon the Duke of Grafton, as the 

* Letter 8, 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 151 

head of that, ministry, whom he and the others of the 
Grenville party, in conjunction with the whig-party in 
general, were desirous of displacing. 

I shall not trouble you with many remarks in relation 
to this minister ; a few, however, are necessary to the 
present argument. I begin with an extract from the 
Notes to Heron's Junius. Heron says, that Junius in 
this Letter took occasion to open his attack on the 
Duke of Grafton by joining in the outcry of popular 
resentment, on account of a pardon granted to a Chair- 
man [M'Quirk] who had been condemned for mur- 
der, and whom the populace of London wished rather 
to have seen hanged. * The Duke of Grafton was now 
principal Minister, or first Lord of the Treasury. He 
stood at the head of those whom Junius Mashed to 
frighten from the helm of affairs.' 3Ir Pitt's advice 
to declare War on Spain, was rejected at this time. 
Mr Pitt and Lord Temple, in consequence of this 
rejection, sent in their resignation. ' But the resigna- 
tion of those Ministers was made a signal for raising 
the outrageous clamor of unpopularity against the gov- 
ernment of the sovereign, whose councils they had 
forsaken. When the Duke of Newcastle, and his de- 
pendents at length reluctantly followed the example [of 
Mr Pitt and Lord Temple], a new agency was added 
to increase the bluster of the storm.' [Before this pe- 
riod Mr Pitt and Mr Grenville had been political ene- 
mies, but were now firm friends acting in concert.] 

Lord Chatham had found that the first Lord of the 
Treasury, the Duke of Grafton, though reputed his po- 
litical pupil, was no longer willing to be implicitly 
guided by him. 



152 LETTERS ON THE 

Junius opens his first Letter to the Duke of Grafton 
on the subject of his pardon toM'duirk, the Chairman, 
whose profligacy mercy could not expect to reclaim. 
He insinuates, as Heron observes, that the Ministers 
were not unwilling to encourage riots. In the close of 
the letter he makes an eloquent transition to the case of 
Mr Wilkes, contrasts the pardon of M'Quirk with the 
only pardon which the people were solicitous to obtain, 
viz. Mr Wilkes, who, as I have before observed, was a 
neighbor of Lord Temple, in the country, and who had 
for some time been engaged with him in writing for the 
North Briton, for publishing the celebrated 45th Number 
of which Mr Wilkes was now suffering. 

Junius's next Letter to the Duke of Grafton (Letter 
9th), like the former, was written chiefly on account of 
Mr Viilkcs — * The fame of Junius was now rising 
every day higher.' Mr Edward Weston thought fit to 
reply to the imputations of Junius (Weston was a re- 
tainer in some subordinate capacity in the service of 
government), by a laboured defence of the pardon of 
M'Quirk. Junius, in Letter 10, (April 21, 1769), replied 
to Weston in what Heron justly cafls ' a letter of haughty 
exprobration,' but which it is unnecessary to quote. 

On Junius's third Letter to the Duke of Grafton 
(Letter 11), Heron observes — That it is * a skilful 
and eloquent composition.' That Lord Chatham had 
abandoned the Duke ; and it was expected, that the 
Duke himself would shrink away from before the storm. 
He (the Duke) stood his ground. He was even irri- 
tated to take a part against the man who had been once 
his friend, Mr Wilkes. Junius endeavors to make him 
ridiculous, by alluding to Miss Parsons, a favorite of 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. JLI^ 

the Duke's — * that he deserted, for her arms, his official 
duties, and that her beauty had faded.' 

The former Letters of Junius, says Heron, whatever 
secret pain they might have given to the Duke of Graf- 
ton, had produced no alteration in his public conduct. 
The Duke, however, at this time, had separated from 
Ann Parsons. ' The power of Junius over public opin- 
ion, was in the mean time astonishingly increased ; and 
he was already regarded as the most formidable of all 
the foes of the ministry .... Redetermined, therefore, 
to try what might be done by one General Letter of 
satire upon the whole character of the Minister, both 
in public and in private life.' Junius to the Duke of 
Grafton : ' You had already taken your degree with 
credit, in those schools in which the English nobility 
are formed to virtue, when you were introduced to Lord 
Chatliam's protection. He gave you to the world with 
an air of popularity, which young men usually set out 
with, but seldom preserve. Lord Chatham was the ear- 
liest object of your political wonder and attachment ; 
yet you deserted him with the first hopes that offered 
of an equal share of power with Lord Rockingham. 
When the Duke of Cumberland's first negotiation failed, 
£fnd when the Favorite [Lord Bute] was pushed to the 
last extremity, you saved him, by joining with an ad- 
ministration in which Lord Chatham had refused to 
engage. Still, however, he was your friend, and you 
are yet to explain to the world, why you consented to 
act without him ; or why, after uniting with Lord Rock- 
ingham, you deserted and betrayed him.' The con- 
duct of the Duke of Grafton towards Mr Wilkes is then 
exhibited again in strong relief: ' You complained that 



154 LETTERS ON THE 

no measures were taken to satisfy your patron, and that 
your friend Mr Wilkes, who had suffered so much for 
the party, had been abandoned to his fate. They have 
since contributed, not a little, to your present plenitude 
of power ; yet, I think, Lord Chatham has less reason 
than ever to be satisfied ; and, as for Mr Wilkes, it is 
perhaps the greatest misfortune of his life, that you 
should have so many compensations to make in the 
closet for your former friendship with him. Your gra- 
cious master understands your character ; and makes 
you a persecutor, because you have been a friend.^ * 

In the Miscellaneous Letters also, Junius (under his 
signature of Atticus) thus speaks of the Duke of Graf- 
ton's conduct to Wilkes and Lord Chatham : He ' looked 
up to Lord Chatham with astonishment, and was the 
declared advocate of Mr Wilkes. It afterwards pleased 
his Grace to enter into administration with his friend 
Lord Rockingham, and, in a very little time, it pleased 
his Grace to abandon him. He then accepted of the 
treasury, upon terms which Lord Temple had dis- 
dained.' t 

Upon a consideration of all the circumstances, there- 
fore, both in relation to the general object of Lord Tem- 
ple's party, which was to displace the ministry — and 
also to the personal animosity, which he wonld naturally 
feel towards the Duke of Grafton for his treachery to 

* Letter 12. 

t ' Which Lord Temple had disdained.' A similar sentiment 
occurs in relation to this transaction, in Lord Temple's Pam- 
phlet of 176G, where the same terms are used to express in the 
strongest manner his rejection of this offer. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 155 

Mr Wilkes, and especially to Lord Chatham — we find 
the most powerful motives for the severity of Junius's 
attack upon his Grace, then the prime minister of the 
kingdom. What other motives there were, besides 
those which we can collect from the public histories of 
that day, I do not know ; probably others did exist, 
as Junius seems to have had a peculiar rancour against 
the Duke. He says — ' You are the pillow upon which 
I am determined to rest all my resentments. ' And 
again — 'Every villain in the kingdom is your friend.' 
* Next to the Duke of Grafton, I verily believe the 
blackest heart in the kingdom belongs to Lord Bar- 
rington.' I am, &c. 



LETTER XIX. 

Sir, 

I have gone so minutely into the history of some 
of the distinguished men of Junius's day, who were 
most immediately connected with him, that it is not 
necessary to pursue our inquiry, with the same par- 
ticularity, in relation to many others who are the sub- 
jects of his Letters. But, assuming Lord Temple to 
have been the writer of Junius, we find a natural and 
easy solution of every question that has occasioned 
any real difficulty, in relation to the authorship of that 
work. I will, however, ask your attention to some cir- 
cumstances which could not be well introduced before, 
in relation to some other individuals than those already 
considered. 



156 LETTERS ON THE 

The Dake of Bedford is among those who, as Junius 
says, are called upon * to act or to suffer ' in the course 
of his Letters. This nobleman belonged to a family, 
which had been long distinguished for its whig princi- 
ples. A brief history of it is given by Heron (Letter 
23), from which I extract only a small part, which will 
suffice for the present purpose. 'At the accession of 
the House of Hanover, this family (the Russels) were 
found among its firmest friends ; and, as such, were 
favored and honored. The administration of Sir Rob- 
ert Walpole had the support of the Duke of Bedford. 
Nor was it till after he had married the sister of Lord 
Gower, and had began to be dissatisfied with the feeble 
administration of the Pelhams, that the Duke, to whom 
Junius addresses his letters, began to set himself at the 
head of a particular party and to offer occasional oppo- 
sition to the measures of a government, that lo as found- 
ed upon the revolution settlement. The Gower family 
had been noted as steady tories. But Lord Gower be- 
came one of the most notorious examples of apostacy 
from the Tory cause, for the sake of winning the favor 
of a whig-administration. Dr Johnson, among others, 
was so much enraged at this defection, that he wished 
to have preserved the name of a Gower, in his Diction- 
ary, as another name for an apostate or betrayer. The 
alliance between the house of Gower and that of Bed- 
ford seemed to form a new party, that was neither whig 
nor tory. At that time the parties in Parliament were 
not fewer than five — the Pitt and Grenville party; 
the Bedford party ; the predominant party of the Pel- 
hams ; the Tories, with the rest who paid their court to 
the Prince of Wales ; and the friends of the Duke of 
Cumberland, who were headed by Henry, the father of 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 157 

Charles Fox. The Bedford party could not of them- 
selves form an efficient administration, but were suffi- 
ciently formidable to be courted by all the rest. The 
Pelhams received them ; but they wanted character 
and popularity, though not deficient in talents ; and it 
became unavoidably necessary to employ Pitt and tlic 
Grenvilk:^. While Pitt dictated measures at the end 
of George the Second's reign, the Duke of Bedford, 
like the other parties, gave him their support. The 
Lieutenancy of Ireland was worthy of the Duke's rank 
and ambition; and its patronage enabled him to pro- 
vide amply for his creature, Righi/, as well as to per- 
form some acts of magnificent beneficence, in v/hich os- 
tentation had no share. He next condescended to become 
the political ally of Bute; went ambassador to Paris, 
and had the honor, or the infamy, of being the ostensible 
negotiator of the peace of 1763. After his return from 
France, the Duke was, for a short time, discontented 
with Lord Bute and the Court. But a vacancy was 
soon left in the ministry, which he and his friends were 
called to fill. Lord Bute and this uqw administration 
were soon mutually dissatisfied with each other. The 
opposition between the Court and the Ministry became 
publicly known ; and an. attempt was made to substitute 
Pitt, Lyttleton, and Temple, instead of Halifax, Bed- 
ford, and Grenville, in the chief offices of the Ministry. 
It failed of success. The Duke of Bedford saw Lord 
Bute and even the king himself at his mercy. He 
used his advantage cruelly ; obliging the king to expel 
from official employment all such of his servants as 
were supposed to have been appointed at the recom- 
mendation of the Earl of Bute ; and in particular Mr 
14 



158 LETTERS ON THE 

Stuart Mackenzie, that nobleman's brother, whom the 
king had before voluntarily promised never to dismiss 
from office. Such an insolent triumph was not to be 
endured by the sovereign. The Newcastle and Rock- 
ingham Whigs were invited to come into office almost 
upon their own terms ; and the Duke of Bedford and 
his associates were with great indignation dismissed. 

From various causes the Duke of Bedford became 
very unpopular, and was willing to get into favor with 
the court party. When the king grew weary of the 
Rockingham administration, and again courted the 
Grenvilies, the Duke of Bedford, the friend of George 
Grenville, eagerly threw himself into the negotiation ; 
but was scornfully slighted by Lord Bute, who had not 
yet forgotten the insolent dismission of his brother. 
Lord Chatham then, by command of the king, formed 
a new administration. But he soon found himself una- 
ble to withstand the opposition which the Rockingham 
Whigs, the Bedford party, and the friends of George 
Grenville and Lord Temple, were exciting against him. 
He sought the friendship of the Duke of Bedford ; and 
the Duke, with his friends, were not unwilling to serve 
under Lord Chatham. Bat the king had not yet par- 
doned the Duke's former insolence ; and Lord Chat- 
ham was thus hindered from fulfilling the engagements 
he had privately made with the Duke.* Lord Chatham 

* Junius says, in a note to his own edition, printed by Wood- 
fall, vol. i. p. 171, ' That the Ministry having endeavored to 
exclude the Dowager out of the Regency Bill, the Earl of Bute 
determined to dismiss them. Upon this the Duke of Bedford 
demanded an audience of the king, reproached him in plain 
terms with duplicity, baseness, falsehood, treachery, and hypoc- 
risy — repeatedly gave him the lie, and left him in convulsions.' 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 159 

proved unable to superintend and preserve the fabric 
which he had reared. Mr Townsend died ; Mr Con- 
way resigned; the Duke of Grafton deserted Lord 
Chatham, for the friendships which were to be found 
at Court ; Lord Chatham himself, at last abandoning 
the Ministry which he had formed, loas reconciled to 
his brothers and to the Rockingham Whigs. At that 
crisis the Duke of Bedford accepted the offers of the 
Court, joined the Duke of Grafton, and drew upon 
himself the fiercest rage of all the Whigs, by making 
himself, as they conceived, the saviour of Lord Bute, of 
the Tories, and of the system of secret influence in 
the closet. After more than a year from the formation 
of the coalition, which still stood unshaken, Junius at- 
tacked the Duke of Bedford, in the manner which 
every reader recollects, in the celebrated letter of Sep- 
tember 19, 1769, (No. 23). The Duke's whole public 
and private conduct are there reviewed ; and whatever 
is odious, mean, or unpopular in his conduct, is rendered 
still more so by the consummate skill and eloquence of 
the writer. ' The contrast,' says Heron, ' of a fancied 
good character with the actual bad one of the Duke of 
Bedford ; the artful imputation of treachery won by 
bribes in the negotiating of the peace ; the hinted 
coarseness and vulgarity of the object of his satire in 
his private pleasures ; the recalling that outrage to recol- 
lection, with which the Duke had, on a former occa- 
sion, treated his sovereign ; the suggestion, that the 
Duke might now fancy all his plans of ambition con- 
summated and himself indisputable master of the voi- 
ces of the cabinet council ; above all, the alarming 
earnestness with which, in the concluding paragraphs, 



IGO LETTERS ON THE 

the Duke is taught to believe the whole empire to be, 
as it were, in arms against him ; compose together an 
assemblage of splendid parts, forming certainly one of 
the most powerfully and elaborately eloquent of all this 
collection of Letters.' * 

Lord Temple himself could not have given a better 
historical account of facts than is contained in this 
brief sketch, which I have extracted from Heron's 
Notes. 1st, the attempt (as stated in Lord Temple's 
Pamphlet of 1766) by Mr Pitt and Lord Temple to 
form an administration, and its failure ; 2d, a Ministry 
formed by Mr Pitt and opposed by George Grenville, 
his brother, and the Duke of Bedford, who had been 
removed to make room for Mr Pitt's Ministry, and had 
united himself with Lord Temple's party ; 3d, the fail- 
ure of Mr Pitt in consequence of this opposition ; 4th, 
the desertion of the Duke of Grafton ; 5th, the recon' 
ciliation with his brothers, Lord Temj)le and Mr Gren- 
ville ; and, lastly, their disappointment on the Duhe of 
Bedford's deserting them and joining the Duke of 
Grafton. These are, certainly, sufficient reasons for 
the indignation of Junius, that is. Lord Temple, 
against the Duke of Bedford. 

I stop one moment to ask, whether it is possible, that 
this letter to the Duke of Bedford, could have been 
penned by Sir Philip Francis, by Home Tooke, by Mr 
Lloyd ; in short by any one but him who moved in the 
sphere of action described — by any but one who felt 
his pre-eminence of station, of character, of intellect, 
of disappointment ? It could have proceeded from no 
other than Lord Temple. I am, &:-c. 

* Heron's Junius, vol. i. p. 261. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 



161 



LETTER XX. 

Sir, 

The attack of Junius on the Marquis of Granby, 
though of minor importance in some points of view, 
was a necessary part of the plan of operations in Lord 
Temple's party. He was the commander-in-chief of 
the army ; and, as Heron says, was ' one of the most 
popular of all the members of the administration ; and, 
since it was the object of Junius to overthrow the min- 
istry, he thought it necessary to use peculiar pains to 
blast the popularity of those of them, of whom public 
opinion was inclined to judge the least unfavorably.' 
Heron adds, that this attack on the Marquis of Granby 
was 'inspired with all the artful vehemence of personal 

and political hatred His military friends were 

enraged, that the secrecy of a fictitious name should 
conceal that author from their vengeance. Lord George 
Germaine (afterwards known as Lord Sackville), not 
undeservedly disgraced for not having eagerly done his 
duty in the battle of Minden, was supposed to be the 
only man, at least the only military man, who could 
wTite so well, and could have secret motives for writing 
so bitterly against Lord Granby.'* 

But the commander-in-chief was made a more con- 
spicuous character in the scene, from the circumstance 
of his being defended, unsuccessfully, by an officer in 
the army, whose complete defeat by Junius on this oc- 
casion is one of the most striking incidents in the course 

* Heron's Junius, vol. i, page.s 37, 43, notes. 

14* 



162 



LETTERS ON THE 



of the Letters — I allude to Sir William Draper. It 
is supposed that this officer ' was ambitious to shew 
that the commander-in-chief had a military friend, who 
could defend his political reputation with greater gal- 
lantry than this terrible secret enemy, and at least with 
equal eloquence. Sir William was not a mere soldier ; 
he had received an excellent education, and had been 
for a considerable time a residing member of an uni- 
versity .... On several occasions, his ability as a writer 
was made known to the public ; always with advan- 
tage. He had a vanity in showing, that he was no less 
an elegant scholar than a gallant and skilful soldier. 
There was a mixture of literary ambition, soldierly 
frankness, and ardent friendship in his eager interpo- 
sition to defend the Marquis of Granby against the 
bold imputations of Junius. So far as literary fame 
might be his object, he has not been disappointed. He 
is generally confessed to have been an adversary not 
unworthy of him to whom he opposed himself * 

The result of his contest with Junius is well known 
to every reader. But I shall advert to tu'o or three cir- 
cumstances, so far as the question of authorship is con- 
cerned, which, if Lord Temple was the writer, prove 
how entirely mistaken Sir William Draper was in the 
opinions he seems to have formed of the real Junius. 
Li allusion to a remark that his ( Junius's) ' rank or 
fortune placed him above a common bribe,' Sir William 
sneeringly says — * as you told us of your impor- 
tance, and that you are a person of rank and fortune 
and above a common bribe, you may in all probability 

* Heron's Junius, vol. i, page 44. 



AUTHORSHir OF JUNIUS. 168 

be not unknown to his lordship (Earl Shelburne), who 
can satisfy you of what I say.' But if Lord Temple 
was Junius, this sneer was altogether misplaced. Again, 
Sir William says contemptuously — ' I know not wheth- 
er Junius be considerable enough to belong to any party ; 
if he should be so, can he affirm, that he has always 
adhered to one set of men and measures ? Is he sure, 
that he has never sided with those whom he was first 
hired to abuse 1 Has he never abused those he was 
hired to praise ? ' * Insinuations like these could only 
have excited ridicule in Sir William's real adversary. 

It is a singular circumstance, as Dr Good observes, 
that Sir William Draper and Junius were antagonists 
in political warfare, under signatures mutually unknown, 
so far back as May, 17G7, two years before the series 
of Junius's Letters was begun ; Junius having written 
at that time under the name of PopUcola, and Sir 
William under the signature of W. D. The subject 
of Sir William's observations was a defence of Lord 
Chatham against some strong observations made upon 
his character by Mr Wilkes, in a letter addressed to 
the Duke of Grafton, and which I have already quoted. 
This, you will recollect, was at the period (1767) when 
Lord Temple and Lord Chatham had separated, and 
when the latter had been so severely attacked by the 
former, in his Pamphlet of the preceding year, and in 
his letters of the 28th of April, 1767, which I have 
already quoted (see page 33), and of other dates, quoted 
at pages 86, 87, &c. 

* Letter 4. 



164 LETTERS ON THE 

I would add to this, that I have little or no doubt, 
that Sir William Draper was also the author of a Reply 
to Lord Temple's Pamphlet of 176(5. 1 beg leave to 
refer to a part of it : ' Of the same nature are the 
charges of Lord Chatham's havinor altered his connex- 
ions, which in political matters is so very common a case, 
and often on very good grounds. But has Lord Temple 
to boast that he has not done the same thing with re- 
gard to the nobleman whose interest he voluntarily es- 
poused, or at least with those most in connexion with 
him, but who are now become friends, made from ene- 
mies, because they were the connexions of that brother 
whom he so much condemned and opposed for taking 
part with them against himself. Lord Chatham, and all 
those whom he never ought to have deserted ? ' * 

After Sir Wihiam Draper's defence of his friend, 
Lord Granby, he was soon obliged to relinquish that 
contest, not because he found none upon which to stand, 
but in order to defend himself Foiled, he withdrew 
from the contest, extremely mortified. The public, 
perhaps, are not fiimiliar with a fact of some little inter- 
est to Americans, that shortly afterwards, he left Eng- 
land, arrived in Charleston, South Carolina, in January 
1770, and travelled towards the north as far as New- 
York, receiving that hospitality which in this country 
is always paid to strangers, and with the attentions that 
were due to the merit of such a visitor. At New- 
York he married Miss De Lancy, * a lady of great 
connexions there, and agreeable endowments.' In 
1778, he was appointed Lieutenant-Governor of Minor- 

• London Magazine for 1766. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 165 

ca. He left England in October, 1769; and his last 
letter to Junius, dated the 2d of October, 1769, is 
headed — 'A word at parting to Junius.' A few days 
after the publication of this letter, says Dr. Good, a 
report was circulated, that Sir William Draper, in con- 
sequence of his defence of Lord Granby, had been ap-^ 
pointed to a governorship in America, which Sir William 
contradicted in a note addressed to the printer of the 
Public Advertiser, Oct. 20, 1769 — in which he says — 
' The story has been raised to make the public believe, 
that he has endeavored to vindicate those, whom he 
knows to have been most infamously traduced, for the 
sake of a reward. His motive for this voyage is en- 
tirely curiosity. He has nothing to do with the politics 
of this ministry, or of any other set of men whoso- 
ever. ' * 

His defence of the injured, however well intended, 
was not much valued by those who were the objects of 
it. Junius observes, in a manner which has the appear- 
ance of knowing something about the fact — ' It has 
been said, and I believe truly, that it was signified to 
Sir William Draper, as the request of Lord Granhy, 
that he should desist from writing in his Lordship's de- 
fence. Sir William Draper certainly drew Junius for- 
ward to say more of Lord Granby's character than he 
originally intended. He was reduced to the dilemma 
of either being totally silenced or of supporting his 
first letter.' And Junius did not intend to make him 
a particular subject of attack ; he says, he lamented his 
death ; and ' never spoke of him with resentment.' 

* Woodfall's Junius, Letter 27, note. 



1^ LETTERS ON THE 

Lord Granby too, as Junius asserts, thought proper * to 
condemn, retract, and disavow, by a most solemn decla- 
ration in the House of Commons, that very system of 
political conduct, which Junius had held forth to the 
disapprobation of the public' * 

In connexion with these military characters, I am re- 
minded of a fact which will be enlarged upon hereaf- 
ter — that Lord Temple, from having been in the War 
Department, necessarily became familiarly acquainted 
with those numerous details respecting the army, which 
appear so prominent in some of Junius's Letters, and 
which have led some persons to conclude, though too 
hastily, that Junius must have been himself a military 
officer, or the amanuensis of one. But, I believe, noth- 
ing of a military character will be found in Junius, 
which would not naturally fall under the knowledge of 
any persons at the head of the War Department, 
I am, &c. 

* Junius, note at the end of Letter 8, 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 167 



LETTER XXI. 

Sir, 

I have laid before you a very summary view of 
such facts and circumstances, connected with the prin- 
cipal personages in the letters of Junius, as have a bear- 
ing upon the point of Lord Temple's authorship. I 
shall now bring together various facts, more immediately 
relating to the history of Lord Temple himself, which 
will fully corroborate the conclusions I have drawn 
from the sources above mentioned, I shall, perhaps, 
tax your patience with details ; but, as I have before 
observed, they are indispensable. 

Richard Grenville, afterwards Earl Temple, was, as 
I have before stated, the elder brother of Mr George 
Grenville, who took so conspicuous a part in the meas- 
ures of the British Ministry in relation to the American 
Colonies. Dr Good observes of Junius — 'It is not 
impossible to form a plausible guess at the age of Juni- 
us, from a passage in one of his Private Letters ; an 
inquiry, which, though otherwise of little or no conse- 
quence, is rendered in some measure important as a 
test to determine the validity of the claims that have 
been laid to his writings by different candidates or their 
friends. The passage referred to, occurs in his letter to 
Woodfall, dated Nov. 27, 1771 : " After long eijjcrience 
of the world," says he, " I affirm before God, I never 
knew a rogue who was not unhappy." Now when this 
declaration is coupled with the two facts that he made 
it under the repeated promise and intention of disclos- 
ing himself to his correspondent, and that the corres- 



168 LETTERS ON THE 

pondent thus schooled, by a moral axiom gleaned from 
his own long experience of the world, was at this very 
time something more than thirty years of age, it seems 
absurd to suppose Junius could be much less than fifty, 
or that he affected an age he had not actually attained.' * 

I have not happened to meet with a precise date 
showing the exact age of Lord Temple ; but, his next 
younger brother, George Grenville, was born in 1712, 
and consequently, at the date of the letter just quoted, 
was about fifty-nine years old ; Lord Temple, therefore, 
must at the time have been about sixty or sixty-one 
years old ; a period of life, when he might justly speak 
of his 'long experience of the world.' 

It is observed by Dr Good — ' That he [Junius] was 
not only a man of highly cultivated general talents and 
education, but who had critically and successfully stud- 
ied the language, the law, the constitution and history 
of his native country, is indubitable. Yet this is not 
all; the proofs are just as clear, that he was also a man 
of independent fortune, that he moved in the immedi- 
.ate circle of the court, and was intimately acquainted 
from its first conception, with almost every public meas- 
ure, every ministerial intrigue, and every domestic inci- 
dent.' t 

The opinion here expressed by Dr Good, respecting 
the talents, education, and extensive knovv^ledge of Ju- 
nius, is in accordance with that of every one who has 
ever read Junius. In addition to what lias been already 
stated on the sui)ject of the talents and power of lan- 
guage possessed by Lord Temple, I quote here the pas- 

■* Woodfall's Junius, Preliminary Essay, vol. i, p. 4G. 
f Woodfall's Junius, Preliminary Essay, vol. i, p. 32. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 169 

sage from Smollet's History of England, to which you 
referred. On the debate in Parliament in 1753, upon 
the bill for repealing an act which had allowed Jews to 
be naturalized, Smollet says — ' Though the lords, in 
general, concurred in the expediency of the repeal, it 
was opposed by a few, as too great a sacrifice to the 
idle and unfounded clamors of the multitude ; and upon 
this side of the debate a great power of elocution was 
displayed by Earl Temple — who had lately succeed- 
ed to this title on the death of his mother — a nobleman 
of distinguished abilities, and the most amiable dispo- 
sition, frank, liberal, humane, and zealously attached 
to the interest and honor of his country.' * 

Dr Good further observes of Junius — ' That he was 
a man of easy, if not of affluent circumstances, is un- 
questionable from the fact, that he never could be induc- 
ed in any way or shape to receive any acknowledgment 
from the proprietor of the Public Advertiser for the 
great benefit and popularity he conferred on this paper 
by his writings, and to which he was fairly entitled. 
When the first genuine edition of his letters was on the 
point of publication, Mr Woodfall again urged him 
either to accept half its profits or to point out to him 
some public charity or other institution, to which an 
equal sum might be presented. His reply to this re- 
quest is contained in a paragraph of one of his Private 
Letters, No. 59, and confers credit on both parties : 
* What you say about the profits is very handsome. I 
like to deal with such men. As for myself, be assured 
that / am far above all pecuniary views, and no other 

* Hist, of England, B. 3, Chap. 3, Sect. 9. 

15 



170 LETTERS ON THE 

person, I think, has any claim to share with you. Make 
the most of it, therefore, and let all your views in life 
be directed to a solid, however moderate independence ; 
without it no man can be happy, nor even honest.' In 
this last sentence, continues Dr Good, ' he reasoned 
from the sphere of life in which he was accustomed to 
move ; and, confining it to that sphere, the transactions 
of every day show us that he reasoned correctly.' * In 
another letter, to Woodfall, Junius asks to be informed 
of his expenses, in case of a prosecution for publishing 
the Letter to the King, and promises to indemnify him. 

In the Letter of Junius, 12 April, 1769, he writes — 
' That he is neither a partisan of Mr Wilkes, nor yet 
bought off by the Ministry. It is true I have refused 
offers which a more prudent, or a more interested man 
would have accepted. Whether it be simplicity or a 
virtue in me, I can only affirm that I am in earnest; 
because I am convinced, as far as my understanding is 
capable of judging, that the present ministry are driv- 
ing this country to destruction ; and you, I think. Sir, 
may he satisfied that my rank and fortune place me 
above a common bribe.' 

Compare these remarks with the following account 
of Lord Temple's rank and fortune, for some of the 
particulars of which I am indebted to my friend Mr 

Richard, Earl Temple, was a son of Richard Gren- 
ville of Wootton, who married Hester, eldest daughter 
of Sir Richard Temple of Stowe, in Buckinghamshire, 
and sister of Richard, Viscount and Baron Cobham. 

* Woodfall's Junius, Preliminary Essay, vol. i, p. 32. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 171 

On the death of her brother, this lady became Viscount- 
ess and Baroness Cobham, and was further advanced 
to the dignity of Countess Te?nple. The Countess 
died in 1752, and was succeeded by her eldest son, the 
above-named Richard, Earl Temple,* whom I have in 
these letters considered to be the author of Junius. 
May 4, 1737, he married Arma, daughter and co-heir- 
ess of Thomas Chambers, Esq., of Hanworth, county 
of Middlesex, worth .£90,000. t He had one daughter, 
Elizabeth, (his only child), who died at four years of 
age, 1738. 

It is mentioned in the Annual Register for 1767, 
that on the occasion of the re-election of Alderman 
Beckford, (which was a highly contested election), at 
an entertainment given at Guildhall, but four or five 
of the Aldermen attended, but that Lord and Lady 
Temple were among the guests, and that Lady Tem- 
ple appeared in a splendid dress, with jewelry to the 
amount of fifty thousand pounds. 

I am aware that Mr Barker, in his Letters on Junius, 
says, he is not prepared to admit that Junius was 
* himself a man of high rank, or a scion of nobility.' 
But the arguments of Mr Butler on the other side, as 
quoted by Mr Barker, are not easy to be answered. 
Mr Butler says — ' In the Letter, which we have tran- 
scribed, notice is taken of the tone of equality, in 
which Junius mentions and addresses the very highest 
personages of his times ; how difficult it is for a person 
of inferior rank to do this, appears from Swift's Letters 

* Debrett's Peerage, vol. i, p. 48. 

t Annual Register; and Gentleman's Magazine, for 1737. 



172 LETTERS ON THE 

and anecdotes of him, in which his consciousness of 
inferiority, notwithstanding his assumption of equahty, 
pierces through every disguise. To all his illustrious 
contemporaries, Cicero ever writes en pair ; D' Alembert 
too, in the midst of all his flattery (through which, 
however, his ironical smile is often seen), keeps the 
King of Prussia at a respectful distance.' 

The supposition of Junius's being ' a man of high 
rank,' and that he moved in the immediate circle of the 
court, is also in accordance with another fact which 
appears in every page of his Letters — and which, as 
Dr Good observes, cannot even now be contemplated 
without surprise ; that was, ' the facility with which he 
became acquainted with every ministerial manoeuvre, 
whether public or private, from almost the very moment 
of its conception. At the first moment, the partizans 
of the prime minister [the Duke of Grafton], were ex- 
tolling his official integrity and virtue, in not only re- 
sisting the terms offered by Mr Vaughan for the pur- 
chase of the reversion of a patent place in Jamaica, 
but in commencing a prosecution against Vaughan for 
thus attempting to corrupt him. Junius in his letter of 
Nov. 29, 1769 (No. 33), exposed this affectation of 
coyness, as he calls it, by proving, that the minister 
was not only privy to, but a party concerned in, the 
sale of another patent place.* The rapidity with which 
the aflfair of General Gansell reached Junius, is also no- 
ticed by Dr Good. See Junius's Letters, Nos. 30 and 
31. In his letter to the Duke of Bedford, also, Dr 

* See also Private Letters to Woodfall, No. 15, where particu- 
lars are stated respecting this transaction. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 173 

Good remarks, that he narrates facts, which could 
scarcely be known but to persons immediately acquaint- 
ed with the family ; and when the printer was threatened 
with a prosecution for the Letter to the Duke, Junius 
tells him he has nothing to fear — ' I am sure,' says 
he, ' I can threaten him privately with such a storm as 
would make him tremble even in his grave.'* He was 
equally acquainted with the domestic concerns of Lord 
Hertford's family : ' Nobody is so vociferous as the 
Earl of Hertford on the subject of the late unprecedent- 
ed marriage !' This was the marriage of the Duke of 
Cumberland. Again ; of a Mr Swinney, a correspon- 
dent of the printer's, he observes — ' That Swinney is 
a dangerous fool ; he had the impudence to go to Lord 
George Sackville, whom he had never spoken to, and 
to ask him whether or no he was the author of Junius ; 
take care of him.' 

His secret intelligence respecting public transactions, 
as Dr Good observes, was as extraordinary ; of which 
a remarkable instance is, the notice of the dismission 
of Sir JefTery Amherst — and also his information to 
Woodfall, that a secret expedition of ships of the line 
was fitting out for the East Indies : ' Without regard- 
ing the language of ignorant or interested people, de- 
pend upon the assurance / give you, that, &/C.' f 

He was able to inform his printer who were the au- 
thors of various communications — ' Your Veridicus is 
Mr Whitworth . . . Your Lycurgus is a Mr Kent, a 
young man of good parts,' &c.j: 

* Private Letters to Woodfall, No. 10. 

t Private Letter, No. 28. 

t Private Letters, Nos. 5 and G. 

15* 



174 



LETTERS ON THE 



These circumstances all prove beyond a doubt the 
rank and circle in which Junius moved ; and they all 
correspond with the case of Lord Temple. 

This early information, which Junius possessed, of 
the measures of government, is also particularly noticed 
by Mr Butler. ' Those,' says Mr Butler, ' who recol- 
lect the controversy which took place between the 
Count de Guignes, the French ambassador in this coun- 
try, and Salvador, the Portuguese Jew, in consequence 
of certain stock-jobbing transactions, during the disputes 
between Spain and this country respecting Falkland's 
Island, and the manner in which the British cabinet 
changed on a sudden, from words of war to words of 
peace, must be surprised at the early intelligence which 
Junius gave of this change to Wood fall.' t Now Lord 
Temple, from his situation, knew all about this and 
other measures relating to Spain. I have before men- 
tioned (page 64), the circumstance of his leaving the 
cabinet, with Lord Chatham, because they two, acting 
together, were overruled by the other members, in 
relation to the Spanish war. I am, &c. 

t Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i, page 75. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 176 



LETTER XXII. 
Sir, 



There is another point in the history of Junius, as 
Dr Good observes, which must not be passed over with- 
out observation, although otherwise it might be scarcely 
entitled to notice ; and that is, that during a great part 
of the time from January, 1769, to January, 1772, the 
period included in his letters, he uniformly resided in 
London or its immediate vicinity, and that he never 
quitted his stated habitation for a longer period than a 
few weeks. Incessantly engaged in supporting the pre- 
tensions and character of Junius, attacked as it was by 
numerous writers of the administration, he had no time 
for remote excursions, nor often for relaxation, even in 
the vicinity of the metropolis itself* In a letter of 
Nov. 8, 1769, to Woodfall, he says — ' I have been out 
of town ybr three iveeks.' On another occasion, ' I have 
been some days in the country.' In another letter, 
about Nov. 15, 1771 — ' I want rest most severely, and 
am going to find it in the country for afeiv dai/s.' f 

When we know the fact, that Lord Temple's country 
residence was at Stowe, only about a day's journey 
from London, all this is as naturally explained, as it 
would be difficult of explanation, if, with some, we sup- 
pose that Junius resided in Ireland, or other place re- 
mote from the metropolis. While in London, his resi- 
dence was in PaU-3Iall, from which street he dates his 

* Woodfall's Junius, Preliminary Essay, page 47. 
t Private Lettersi, Nos. 11, 7. 



176 LETTERS ON THE 

letter to Wilkes, to which you referred me. That he 
was not a fixed resident in London would seem to be 
inferable (though not necessarily) from his 58th Letter, 
* addressed to the Livery of London,' which begins 
thus : ' Gentlemen ; i^ you alone were concerned in the 
event of the present election of chief magistrate of 
the metropolis, it would be the highest presumption in a 
stranga^ to attempt to influence your choice, or even 
to offer you his opinion.' 

Now the advocates of Sir Philip Francis and Mr 
Lloyd will not admit, that those writers could be con- 
sidered strangers in London. It was at Lord Temple's 
house in Pali-Mall, also, according to the Memoirs of 
an Eminent Bookseller, quoted by Mr Barker, that Almon 
' did not fail to pay his devoirs once a week, at least, 
and loas always admitted.^ * Mr Almon was called 
' Lord Temple's man. His visits to Pall-Mall and Stowe 
were frequent and notorious. At both places he was 
always received in the most gracious manner.' t I 
would remark here, by the way, that this circumstance 
gives great weight to the statements which I have quoted 
in various instances from Mr Almon. 

Jt is been assumed by many writers on this subject, 
that Junius must have been a military man, from his 
use of military language and his acquaintance with the 
business of the war-office. But these circumstances 
may be easily accounted for, on the supposition of Lord 
Temple's authorship. In the first place he was Lord 

* See above, page 137, and the remark in the note there re- 
specting Lord Sackville. 

t Barker's Letters, page 145. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 177 

Lieutenant of the County of Buckingham, which gave 
him the command of the militia and all military affairs 
of the county, including the commissioning of colonels, 
majors, captains, and subaltern officers. Lord Temple, 
accordingly, we have seen, was, as commander-in-chief 
of the county, required by the king to dismiss Colonel 
Wilkes from his command of a county regiment.* But 
what is of more importance in relation to this point, 
was his being for a considerable period in the war de- 
partment, and first Lord of the Admiralty. And dur- 
ing that period, as I have before observed, he planned 
and conducted the most important measures of the war ; 
which gave to Lord Chatham his great popularity and 
fame. These situations, and his necessary intercourse 
with military men, would of course give him a sufficient 
familiarity with military language to enable him to use 
so much of it as would be generally understood by his 
readers. Certain it is, that the same ready use of mili- 
tary language occurs in Lord Temple's Pamphlet of 
1766. 

I transcribe from a single leaf of that Pamphlet, a 
few military phrases, to compare with some from Ju- 
nius's Letters. 

' For a little time he (Mr Pitt) was quiet, but his 
ever restless ambition soon broke out, and he aimed at 
the sole guidance of the State, which he seemed re- 
solved to take hy storm' ' It is his nature to bear no 
control ; therefore the king was taken captive in his 
closet, and made prisoner upon the throne.' 

* See page 137. 



178 LETTERS ON THE 

* This little corps, contemptible in numbers, and des- 
picable in abilities, is to be reinforced by subalterns of 
the late ministry ; by those whose excessive lust for 
office, whose ingratitude, meanness, and subserviency, 
would not suffer them to follow the resignations and 
dismissions of their patrons. The moment these heard 
there was another recruiting Serjeant in town, they in- 
stantly deserted both the officers and colors under which 
they had first enlisted, and for present pay and good 
quarters, repaired to the drumhead o^ the enemy, ^ 

We have here a greater collection of military phrases 
than is to be found in all Junius's Letters ; and yet the 
author was not by profession a military man. 

Mr Butler and Mr Wilkes came to the conclusion, 
that Junius ' had lived with military men, from the pro- 
priety of his language on military subjects. And Mr 
Barker has given in his appendix, upon the authority 
of a friend, severi instances of Junius's ' images and 
illustrations,' drawn from the military art ; which may 
be compared with those I have just given from the Pam- 
phlet of 1766 : 

1. ' As if an appeal to the public were no more than 
a military coup de main, where a brave man has no 
rules to follow but the dictates of his courage.' Let- 
ter 3. 

2. ' A submissive administration was at last gradually 
collected from the deserters of all parties, interests, and 
connexions, and nothing remained but to find a leader 
for these gallant, well-disciplined troops.' Letter 15. 

3. 'His palace is besieged — the lines of circumval- 
lation are drawing around him, and unless he finds a 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 179 

resource in his own activity, the best of princes must 
submit to the confinement of a state prisoner until your 
Grace's death, or some less fortunate event, shall raise 
the siege.' Letter 23. 

4. ' I may quit the service, but it would be absurd to 
suspect me of desertion.' Letter 44. 

5. ' The favor of his country constitutes the shield 
which defends him against a thousand daggers — deser- 
tion would disarm him.' Letter 59. 

6. ' The wary Wedderburne, the pompous Suffolk, 
never threw away the scabbard, nor ever went upon a 
forlorn hope.' Letter 59. 

7. ' When the contest turns upon the interpretation 
of the laws, you cannot, without a formal surrender of 
all your reputation, yield the post of honor even to 
Lord Chatham.' Letter 69. 

The author of ' Junius Unmasked,' Boston, 1828, 
has observed, that — 'Junius, had been a soldier — 
as Lord Sackville had been ;' to which I would apply 
the remarks already made on this point. 

I am, fee. 



180 LETTERS ON THE 



LETTER XXIIL 

Sir, 

As Junius has been thought to be a military man, 
because he occasionally uses military expressions, so he 
has, by many persons, been thought a lawyer, from his 
use of the language of lawyers. Without having the 
presumption myself to judge of his use of professional 
language, I beg leave only to refer to his express decla- 
rations on this head. That he was not a lawyer, I 
think is very clear, from his letter to Lord Mansfield, 
as follows : 

* To prove the meaning and intent of the legislature, 
will require a minute and tedious deduction. To in- 
vestigate a question of law demands some labor and 
attention, though very little genius or sagacity. As a 
practical profession, the study of the law requires but 
a moderate portion of abilities. The learning of a 
pleader is usually upon a level with his integrity. The 
indiscriminate defence of right and wrong contracts 
the understanding, while it corrupts the heart. Subtle- 
ty is soon taken for wisdom, and impunity for virtue. 
If there be any instances upon record, as some there 
are undoubtedly, of genius and morality united in a 
lawyer, they are distinguished by their singularity, and 
operate as exceptions.' * 

I ought to add, that it is said that Lord Eldon de- 
clared in the House of Lords, that * the author of the 
Letters of Junius, if not a lawyer, must certainly have 

* Letter C8. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 181 

written in concert with the ablest and best of lawyers.' * 
But, on the other hand, Mr Butler, the eminent English 
lawyer, has declared that Junius could not be a lawyer, 
because of * his gross inaccuracy ' in the use of legal 
terms. Now Lord Temple was not a lawyer by pro- 
fession ; but at the time of writing Junius's Letters, 
Lord Chatham, and his brother, George Grenville, the 
latter of whom was bred to the law, were his confiden- 
tial friends ; and he was himself undoubtedly as well read 
in the laws of his country as every gentleman ought to 
be, who takes a share in the affairs of his government. 

Again — the writers on this question remark, that 
Junius was friendly to the politics of the North Briton. 
So was Lord Temple, being himself one of the contribu- 
tors to that publication, in conjunction with Charles 
Churchill and Mr Wilkes. 

Junius, it is also agreed, must have been a personal 
and political friend of Mr George Grenville. It has 
appeared through the whole course of our inquiry, that 
Lord Temple was warmly attached to Mr Grenville, 
his own brother, and in constant friendship with him, 
except during the period of the quarrel with Lord Chat- 
ham. 

Junius was also an enemy of Lord Chatham at one peri- 
od, and afterwards his friend. This has also been shown 
to have been the case with Lord Temple, and exactly at 
the periods when the breach and reconciliation took 
place between him and Lord Chatham. 

He was also a zealous supporter of the cause in which 
Mr Wilkes was engaged, apart from personal regard for 

* Heron's Junius, vol. i, p. 70. 

16 



182 LETTERS ON THE 

him; and, on the other hand, he was friendly to Mr 
Wilkes independently of the cause. So was Lord Tem- 
ple. This regard for Wilkes and the cause, was, no 
doubt, one reason for Lord Temple's utter detestation 
of Lord Barrington's character. He was the man who 
moved for the expulsion of Wilkes, in which he was 
seconded by Mr Rigby. Lord Barrington, however, says 
Dr Good, was besides guilty of atrocities which no man 
can yet have forgotten, nor will, but with the total obli- 
vion of his name. He had also deceived Lord Temple 
himself* Mr Wilkes never deserted his friend Lord 
Temple, while he lived. 

Dr Good says — ' To judge of the moral and political 
character of Junius from his writings, as well private 
as public, he appears to have been a man of bold 
and ardent spirits, tenaciously honorable in his per- 
sonal connexions, but vehement and inveterate in his 
enmities, and quick and irritable in conceiving them.' t 

Mr Almon, who had been on the most intimate terms 
with Lord Temple for nearly twenty years, says of him 
— ' The natural disposition of this noble Lord was the 
most amiable that can be conceived to his friends, but 
when oifended, his disapprobation was warm and con- 
spicuous, — his language flowed spontaneously from 
his feelings ; his heart and his voice always corres- 
ponded.' J 

I proceed to notice some other circumstances, which 
are stated by writers on this question, and which de- 
serve attention. 

* Junius's Miscellaneous Letters, No. 113. 

t Preliminary Essay, page 65. 

t Almon's Anecdotes of Chatham, vol. 2, page 29. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 183 

Mr Taylor, as quoted by Mr Barker, says — ' To 
have approved at the same time of Mr Grenville and 
Lord Chatham was impossible,' But this apparent diffi- 
culty is explained by adverting to the quarrel and re- 
conciliation with Mr Grenville in 1765, and with Lord 
Chatham in 1768. Junius's Letters began after this, 
January 21, 1769. 

The Edinburgh Review observes — ' A simple test 
ascertains the political connexions of Junius — the only 
circumstance which he could not disguise, because it 
could not be concealed without defeating his general 
purpose. He supported the cause of authority against 
America — with Mr Grenville, the minister — against 
the Stamp Act. He maintained the highest popular 
principles on the Middlesex election, with the same 
statesman, who was the leader of opposition on that 
question. No other party in the kingdom but the 
Grenvilles combined these two opinions.' 

On this it may be remarked, that even the Grenville 
party did not at all periods combine these opinions, un- 
less we consider Lord Temple to represent the party. 
For a time he was against Mr Grenville and Lord Chat- 
ham, members of that party ; but, as before observed, 
they were all afterwards reconciled, and acted in con- 
cert 

The same Review further says — ' Whoever revives 
the inquiry, therefore, unless he discovers positive and 
irresistible evidence in support of his claimant, should 
shew him to be politically attached to the Grenville par- 
ty, which Junius certainly was ; and must also produce 
some specimens of his writings of tolerable length, 
such as might afford reasonable grounds for believing 



IM LETTERS ON THE 

that he could have written those Letters, which must 
be allowed to be finished models, though not of the 
purest and highest sort, of composition.' 

The facts and circumstances stated in the course of 
the preceding letters, show minutely Junius's political 
and personal attachments, and fulfil the first of these 
two conditions ; and the specimens of composition, 
which I have ventured to call Lord Temple's, upon 
good evidence, as I think, are sufficient to satisfy the 
other. 

The Reverend Mr Fellowes, a correspondent of Mr 
Barker's, says — ' George Grenville himself could not 
have been the author of Junius's Letters. The senti- 
ments and the diction were above his reach. He had 
little illumination of mind and no command of style.' * 
Mr Fellowes is correct in the fact, that Mr Grenville 
could not have been the author ; but, whether he gives 
a good reason for it or not, in the incapacity of Mr 
Grenville, we need not decide, as there is another rea- 
son which he strangely overlooked, but which is conclu- 
sive — that is, Grenville died in the year 1770, but Ju- 
nius continued to write for two years afterwards. 

Mr Barker, after a full and candid examination, and 
upon the autlwrity of Dr Farmer, Dr Forster, Dr Parr, 
and the late Peter Walsh, Esq. (who, each pursuing a 
different course arrived at the same point, viz. that 
Charles Lloyd was the writer), adopts the conclusion — 
' that Lloyd was concerned in the authorship of the 
Letters, either as the amanuensis, or as a collector of 
intelligence, or " the conveyancer " of the Letters them- 
selves.' But the supposition that Lord Temple was the 

* Barker's Letters, p. 269, 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. ISH 

writer, will render it unnecessary to assume, that Lloyd 
had any concern whatever in them. Mr Wilkes, Mr 
Butler, and some others, have considered Junius's 
praise of Lord Chatham to be ' ironical.' But, if I am 
not wholly mistaken in the case, this supposition is as 
unnecessary as the preceding. 

From these and other circumstances, it probably hap- 
pened, that at the time of Junius's Letters, a writer in 
the Public Advertiser, of Nov. 18, 1771, treated Lord 
Temple, not as Junius, but as the patron of Junius — 
' I presume,' says he, ' the conclusion is not a rash one, 
from these premises, (to omit, for the present, several 
others), that the patron of Junius is the person charac- 
terised in my last — Lord Temple.' * 



LETTER XXIV. 

Sir, 

In reviewing what I have written to you, I find 
some omissions of particulars, which may be important 
by way of fortifying my opinion as to the authorship 
of Junius ; and I will endeavor to supply those omissions, 
though the succeeding remarks would have been better 
inserted in some of my former letters. I shall mention 
them, as they occur to me ; asking indulgence for the 
want of order and method in which they are offered, 



* Barker's Letters, p. 31 G. 

16* 



186 



LETTERS ON THE 



and which, I fear, has been too much the case in my 
former letters. 

In the Gentleman's Magazine for October, 1828, a 
reviewer of Mr Barker's Letters on Junius, has the 
following, which is also in the Letters : ' The famous 
Welsh Judge, George Hardinge, says — I know enough 
of Junius to know, that he was of Lord Temple's school, 
and that he wrote that paper from hints and materials 
prompted by him. So far he was betrayed upon a fact 
known only to three persons. Lord Chatham, Lord 
Camden, Lord Temple. The latter, during the whole 
period of Junius, was bitter against the two former ; and 
so was Junius, though with an air of guard and candor. 
Lord Temple had not eloquence or parts enough to have 
written Junius, but I have no doubt that he knew the 
author.' 

This extract contains some truth, but mixed with some 
error. It is true^ that Junius was of Lord Temple's 
school, as I have supposed him to be Lord Temple him- 
self But it is not true, that during the whole period of 
Junius's Letters, Lord Temple was ' bitter against Lord 
Chatham and Lord Camden.' On the contrary, it has al- 
ready appeared, by a comparison of dates, that Lord 
Temple, though he h^A previously had a ' bitter' quarrel 
with Lord Chatham, yet in October, 1768, a reconciliation 
took place, and the next January, (1769), Junius's Letters- 
began, during the whole period of which Junius so far' 
from being ' bitter ' against Lord Chatham, was warm 
in his favor. In his 54th letter, dated the 13th of 
August, 1771, long before he discontinued writing, he 
had become so warm a friend of Lord Chatham, as to 
express his naturally strong feelings in the splendid 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 167 

eulogy to which I have before alluded, and which I beg 
leave to insert in this place : ' It seems I am a partisan 
of the great leader of the opposition. If the charge had 
been a reproach, it should have been better supported. 
I did not intend to make a public declaration of the 
respect I bear Lord Chatham. I well know what un- 
worthy conclusions would be drawn from it. But I am 
called upon to deliver my opinion, and surely it is not 
in the little censure of Mr Home, to deter me from 
doing signal justice to a man, who, I confess, has grown 
upon my esteem.* As for the common sordid views of 
avarice or any purpose of vulgar ambition, I question 
whether the applause of Junius would be of service to 
Lord Chatham. My vote will hardly recommend him 
to an increase of his pension, or to a seat in the cabinet. 
But if his ambition be upon a level with his understand- 
ing — if he judges of what is truly honorable for him- 
self, with the same superior genius, which animates 
and directs him, to eloquence in debate, to wisdom in 
decision, even the pen of Junius shall contribute to 
reward him. Recorded honors shall gather round his 
monument, and thicken over him. It is a solid fabric, 
and will support the laurels that adorn it. I am not 
conversant in the language of panegyric. These 
praises are extorted from me ; but they will wear well, 
for they have been dearly earned.' t 

It may be asked, what gave occasion to Junius's 
being called the 'partisan of Lord Chatham,' and by 
whom was he so called 1 He had not yet written in 
praise of him. Was not the remark thrown out, to at- 

* See the former opinions of Junius, in my preceeding Let- 
ters, p. 87, &c, 

t Junius, Lett, 54. 



188 LETTERS ON THE 

tract notice to what he should say in future numbers 
respecting Lord Chatham ? After this, Lord Chatham, 
' had grown upon his esteem ' — ' Lord Bute found no 
resource of dependence or security in the proud impos- 
ing superiority of Lord Chatham's abilities, the shrewd 
inflexible judgment of Mr Grenville.' Again — ' Noth- 
ing can be more true than what you say about great 
men. They are indeed a pitiful race. Chatham has 
gallantly thrown away the scabbard and never flinched. 
From that moment I began to like him.^ 

Dr Good, in his Preliminary Essay, further observes-— 
* Whether the writer of these letters had any other and 
less worthy object in view than he uniformly avowed, viz. 
a desire to subserve the best political interests of his 
country, it is impossible to ascertain with precision. It 
is unquestionably no common occurrence in history, to 
behold a man thus steadily, and almost incessantly, for 
five years, volunteering his services in the cause of the 
people, amidst abuse and slander from every party, ex- 
posed to universal resentment, unknown, and not daring 
to be known, without having any personal object to ac- 
quire, any sinister motive of individual aggrandisement 
or reward.' 

Lord Temple being the author, is a sufficient answer 
to the above ; Junius says of himself what was true of 
Lord Temple — * my rank and fortune place me above 
a common bribe.' His hopes also of routing the minis- 
try, and coming into place, were never despaired of till 
nearly the close of his letters. In a private letter to 
Woodfall, he writes : * I doubt much whether I shall 
ever have the pleasure of knowing you ; but, but if 
things take the turn I expect, you shall know me bi/ my 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. lo^ 

works.' Things did not, however, take the turn that 
Lord Temple expected ; for he (Junius) writing to Mr 
Woodfall in 1773, his last private letter, says, ' I have 
seen the signals thrown out for your old friend and cor- 
respondent, but it is all alike vile and contemptible. I 
meant the cause and the public —BOTH ARE GIVEN 
UP.' 

Again — Dr Good, on the subject of the politics of 
those times, and of Mr Burke's being suspected of the 
authorship of Junius, says, ' Burke was a decided parti- 
san of Lord Rockingham, and continued so during the 
whole of that nobleman's life. Junius, on the contrary^ 
was a decided friend to Mr George Grenville. Each 
was an antagonist to the other upon the great subject of 
the American Stamp Act.' The above is in part cor- 
rect, though not as understood by the writer. For 
when Lord Temple and Mr Pitt withdrew from the 
ministry, Mr Grenville continued, and acted in concert 
with those who had been in opposition to Lord Temple 
and to Mr Pitt. But in consequence of the warm oppo- 
sition to his Stamp Act, he withdrew and united himself 
again to the interests of Lord Temple and Mr Pitt, al- 
though he had formerly been the persecutor of Mr 
Wilkes. This was the occasion of the remark of Sir 
William Blackstone in his pamphlet, entitled ' An 
Answer to the Question Stated,' as noticed by Junius in 
letter to Sir Wm. Blackstone, thus — ' your first reflec- 
tion is, that Mr Grenville was, of all men, the person, who 
should not have complained of inconsistence with regard 
to Mr Wilkes. This, Sir, is an unmeaning sneer, a 
peevish expression of resentment, or, &c.' It was Mr 
Grenville who advised the issuing of the General War- 



190 LETTERS ON THE 

rant ; and it is observed in the same note that Mr Gren- 
ville afterwards deserted the ministry and attached him- 
self strenuously to the whig party. Upon this apparent 
inconsistency Junius (Lord Temple) shrewdly remarks, 
that whatever propriety or impropriety there might have 
been in Mr Grenville opposing Wilkes personally, the 
present question had nothing to do with it, as he now 
supports him not on account of his personal character, 
but as the instrument of the people at large, whose rights 
and privileges the ministry have grossly violated by their 
conduct towards him.'* 

It is also said of Junius, that neither his enmity, nor 
his patriotism hurried him into any of those political ex- 
travagances, which have peculiarly marked the character 
of the present age ; a limited monarchy he openly pre- 
ferred to a republic. He strenuously opposed the support- 
ers of the Bill of Rights in their endeavors to restore an- 
nual parliaments, and also of disfranchising a number of 
boroughs, which they regarded as corrupt and rotten ; 
and, anterior to the American contest, was as thoroughly 
convinced as Mr George Grenville himself, of the su- 
premacy of the legislature of England over the Ameri- 
can colonies, t 

* Mr Burke speaks thus of Mr Grenville — ' Our little party 
differences have been long ago composed ; and I have acted 
more with him, and certainly with more pleasure with him, 
than ever I acted against him ; undoubtedly Mr Grenville teas a 
first rate figure in this country ; with a masculine understanding, 
and a stout and resolute heart, he had an application undissipat- 
ed and unwearied. If he was ambitious, I will say this for him, 
his ambition was of a noble and generous strain.' 
t Dr Good's Preliminary Essay, 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 191 

Junius observes, ' I can more readily admire the 
liberal spirit and integrity, than the sound judgment 
of any man, who prefers a republican form of govern- 
ment, in this or any other empire of equal extent, to a 
monarchy so qualified and limited as ours.' 

Junius again — 'I question the power dejure of the 
legislature to disfranchise a number of boroughs upon 
the general ground of improving the constitution. When 
you propose to cut away the rotten parts, can you tell 
us what parts are perfectly sound? Are there any 
certain limits, in fact or theory, to inform you at what 
point you must stop, — at what point the mortification 
ends?' 

If Junius had survived fifty years longer, he might 
have had as good reason for altering his opinion now, 
as he had at that time for adopting his own. He 
might have approved of a republican government as 
extensive as the empire of Great Britain, and have been 
convinced, that, both in theory and practice, it is quite as 
wise a system as a limited monarchy ; and that rotten 
boroughs, if they had any, might be amputated without 
endangering the whole body politic. 

I am, &/C. 



192 LETTERS ON THE 



LETTER XXV. 

Sir, 

It appears, by Mr Almon's Anecdotes, that Lord 
Temple came into parliament as a member of the House 
of Commons, at the general election of 1734 ; and in 
1741 he was re-elected ; and, after coming to the peer- 
age, he was of course a member of the House of Lords. 
I allude again to this circumstance, in consequence of 
observing, that some of the writers on this subject are 
of opinion, that Junius was not a member of either 
House. I think it evident from his Letters, that he 
must have been a member. Mr Barker infers from a 
paragraph in one of the Letters to Wilkes, that Junius 
was not in the House of Lords. The passage is this : 
* I should be glad to mortify those contemptible creatures 
who call themselves noblemen, whose worthless impor- 
tance depends entirely upon their influence over bor- 
oughs.' * This proves, says Mr Barker, that Junius 
was not a nobleman. t I cannot perceive that the re- 
mark warrants such an inference ; it amounts to no 
more than various other general remarks of Junius, — 
an expression of his contempt for those, who corruptly 
opposed the liberal whig principles, which he so warmly 
cherished, and which are the subjects of the letter 
where this passage occurs. How efficient Lord Tem- 
ple was in every station to which he was called, has 
appeared from the preceding Letters ; particularly from 

* Woodfall's Junius, Letters to Mr Wilkes, No. 66. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 193 

the testimony of Lord Chatham himself in parliament, 
which I have before quoted (p. 99). I add to this, 
from Almon's Anecdotes, that ' in all measures of con- 
sequence, Mr Pitt solely confided in Lord Temple.' * 

I have observed (p. 8) that the pamphlet of 1766 is 
said by Almon to have been written by Mr Humphrey 
Cotes ; but that the particular facts were communicat- 
ed to him, in conversation, by Lord Temple. I add 
here another extract from Almon's work, taken from 
a manuscript account of Mr Cotes, showing the impor- 
tance which the government attached to Lord Temple's 
talents, and the part he took in regard to public meas- 
ures, and also proving the close and intimate connexion 
between Mr Wilkes and Lord Temple. The extract is 
also important in another point of view — as confirm- 
ing my opinion, that Lord Temple was, substantially, 
the author of the pamphlet of 1766, though it might, 
literally speaking, have been written or committed to 
paper by Mr Cotes. The extract is as follows : 

* Mr Wilkes arrived 12 May, 1766, from France with 
Mr Mackleane (formerly in partnership with Mr Stew- 
art, in a druggist's store at Philadelphia) . . . Mr Wilkes 
had lodgings with Mr Stuart, Holies-street, Cavendish- 
square. Mr Cotes did not know of his coming, till he saw 
the account of his arrival in the Evening Post of Tuesday 
.... Mr Wilkes said he had seen several people from the 
ministers ; they all expressed great wrath against Lord 
Temple for his strong opposition to their measures ; that 
he told them, he [Wilkes] had many and singular obli- 
gations to Lord Temple ; and if that was not the case, 

* Anecdotes, vol. i, p. 226, (chap. 14.) 
17 



1^ LETTERS ON THE 

he had so great a regard for Lord Temple's public and 
private virtues, that nothing under heaven should in- 
duce him to do anything that would give that noble 
lord a moment's uneasiness. He desired me to commu- 
nicate this to Lord Temple .... I went immediately to 
Lord Temple's bed-side, and related the above to him. 
He seemed extremely satisfied with Mr Wilkes's conduct, 
and wished most heartily that the ministers might be as 
good as their promises. He desired me to convey his 
kind compliments to Mr Wilkes, and assure him of his 
friendship, and approbation of his conduct on the present 
occasion ; at the same time he told me that he was very 
certain that Lord Rockingham had not the least intention 

of serving Mr Wilkes Mr Wilkes was extremely 

satisfied with Lord Temple's answer, but seemed to 
think he should succeed with the ministers. He con- 
tinued in the same sentiments a week . . . . T saw him on 
Monday, when my friend was much lowered in his ex- 
pectations, but said he should see Mr Fitsherbert 

next day, and hoped things would go better Next 

day he told me he had got into a damn'd scrape, and 
believed he had been deceived Mt Wilkes re- 
turned to France.' 

From the above account, it appears, by Mr Cotes's 
going to Lord Temple's bed-side immediately, to com- 
municate Mr Wilkes's arrival, that he was in familiar 
intercourse with Lord Temple, perhaps his private sec- 
retary ; and, in writing the pamphlet, he, probably, 
(' assisted by another' *), gave it in Lord Temple's own 
words. Indeed, I was so fully impressed, from the be- 

* See p. 8. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 196 

ginning, before having seen any of these things, that I 
did not hesitate, as you know, in ascribing the pam- 
phlet to Lord Temple. 

In the course of my inquiry, 1 have often been sur- 
prised at the assertions made, respecting Junius and 
his opinions, without any foundation. Mr Chalmers, 
in his book, ascribing Junius to Mr Boyd, has this re- 
mark — that * Mr Almon says, Junius always speaks 
handsomely of Lord Temple, praising his firmness, 
perseverance, patriotism, and virtue ;' and that Almon 
adds, from his own knowledge, that whenever Boyd 
spoke of Lord Temple, it was always in similar terms. 
But I would ask, where does Junius praise Lord Tem- 
ple 1 I have before remarked to you, that he does not even 
name him in the body of his Letters ; and in the notes, 
he simply mentions his name in the casual manner I 
have noticed.* This omission was one of the very cir- 
cumstances which originally excited my suspicions as 
to the authorship. 

On this point, Mr Barker has a just remark in rela- 
tion to the claims of Sir Philip Francis. He says — 
' I would have the reader consider, whether the little, 
however pardonable, vanity of referring to himself by 
name, as Sir Philip Francis does in the anonymous 
pamphlet, is not more characteristic of himself than of 
the high-minded and proud Junius.' t 

Permit me to add, in this place, a remark or two in 
respect to Mr. Taylor's work on the claims of Sir Philip 
Francis. He states, that ' Sir Philip declares he was 
in the House of Lords on the night (January 9, 1770) 

* See p. 3. 

t Barker's Letters, p. 48. 



196 LETTERS ON THE 

this speech was made, and that he heard Lord Chat- 
ham make use of the very words which it contains. 
In this instance the identity is brought home.' ' I heard 
it from Lord Chatham/ says Sir Philip, 'that power 
without right is the most odious and detestable object 
that can be offered to the human imagination.' Mr 
Barker very properly asks, ' what evidence is there that 
Sir Philip was not hired to report these two speeches ' 
of Lord Chatham. But Lord Temple was present, as 
you will see by the journals of that debate, and of 
course heard it himself * Again; Mr Barker says — 
' I must, in the most positive manner, deny the possi- 
bility of his [Sir Philip] having the leisure to write 
the public Letters of Junius, which pre-suppose the 
most ample leisure, and the most undivided attention.' 
Now Lord Temple had both, and, as we have seen also, 
had the motives, and inclination. 

It is said by Mr Taylor, that at the meeting of par- 
liament in January, 1770, a great struggle was made to 
effect a change of ministers. On this occasion, it is 
evident, how much he [Junius] was personally interest- 
ed. A fortnight before the opening, he wrote to Wood- 
fall — ' I doubt much whether I shall ever have the 

* Though Lord Temple was present at this debate, yet the 
speech was probably reported by some other person for him. 
In Almon's Anecdotes (vol. ii, p. 7C), which were in part fur- 
nished by Lord Temple, it is stated, that Lord Chatham's 
' speeches on that day have fortunately met with a better fate 
than many of his former speeches, for they were accurately 
taken by a gentleman of strong memory, now [1791] a member 
of the House of Commons ; and from his notes they are here 
printed.' They were probably furnished to Alraon by Lord 
Temple.— £diY. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 197 

pleasure of knowing you ; but if things take the turn I 
expect, you shall know me by my works.' Private 
Letters to Woodfall, No. 17. No one in the kingdom 
could be more deeply interested than Lord Temple ; he 
and his friends were anticipating a change, which should 
bring them into power ; and in that event, doubtless Mr 
Woodfall would have known Junius ' by his works.' 

' The real Junius,' says Mr Barker, ' was evidently 
an early friend of Almon.' * Lord Temple was this 
friend, as we have seen from various circumstances, as 
well as the declarations of Almon himself 

Mr Barker quotes from a letter of Mr Calcraft to Al- 
mon, dated ' Ingress, Dec. 29, 1771,' the following : 
' You cannot conceive either the questions 1 am asked, 
or the innumerable reports about Lord Temple.' And 
the same gentleman says, Jan. 1772, ' I am glad there 
is a prospect of another Letter' f Mr Calcraft was a 
particular friend of Lord Temple, and was the mediator 
who brought about the reconciliation between him and 
Lord Chatham. I cannot but think he suspected Lord 
Temple as the author of Junius, and hoped to draw it 
out from Almon. At the dates of these two letters, Ju- 
nius was attacking Lord Mansfield. 

I am, &c. 

" Barker's Letters, page 128. t Ibid, 146. 



17' 



198 



LETTERS ON THE 



LETTER XXVI. 

Sir, 

I have already given you some extracts from Lord 
Temple's Pamphlet, of 1766, called An Enquiry into 
the Conduct of a late Right Honorable Commoner (Mr 
Pitt), for comparison with the language and sentiments 
of Junius. I now send more, to be used in connexion 
with those already in your possession. 

' Until they thunder at our gate.' — Junius' s Miscel- 
laneous Letters, No. 47, (Oct. 15, 1768). 

' He thundered against Hanover.' — Enquiry, S^c. 

*The incapacity of their (the administration) leaders 
to promote any other without ividening their bottom.' — 
Miscellaneous Letters, No 49. 

* In order to widen and strengthen the bottom of his 
administration. — Enquiry. 

' His being plunged into a correspondence of courts.* 
Miscellaneous Letters, No. 49. 

' He plunged us deeper into the German war.' 

Enquiry, 

' I would not descend to a reproachful word against 
men (the ministry), who^e persons I hardly know' 

Atticus, page 291. 

' A ministry whose names were almost unknown till 
they appeared in the Gazette.' — Enquiry. 

' He (Mr Pitt) is indeed a compound of contradic- 
tio7is.' — Miscellaneous Letters, page 260. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 1^ 

' With whom, besides, is the late Commoner (Mr 
Pitt) in league 1 With Col. Barre, who called him a 
heap of contradictions.^ — Enquiry. 

' It is true I have refused offers, which a more pru- 
dent or a more interested man would have accepted. 
Whether it be simplicity or virtue in me, I can only 
affirm that I am in earnest, because I am convinced,' 
&/C. — Miscellaneous Letters, No. 54, in 17(39. 

* Earl Temple, who, with a magnanimity almost pe- 
culiar to himself, disdained to wear the chains, or put 
on the livery of such an incompetent statesman (Bute), 
such a contemptible being ; and at first urged, and at 
length forced the Commoner (Mr Pitt) into resignation ; 
which he accompanied with his own, in order to give 
an example of spirit and resistance to an usurpation^ 
so exceedingly dangerous to both court and people.' 

Enquiry. 

* Mr Pitt acquainted him (Lord Temple), that his 
Majesty had been graciously pleased to send for him to 
form an administration ; and as he thought his Lord- 
ship indispensable, he desired his Majesty to send for 
him, and to put him at the head of the Treasury ; and 
that he himself would take the post of Privy Seal.' 

Enquiry, 1766. 
Earl Temple refused. 

' I have refused offers, &c.' Junius, as above. 

But without selecting passages or single words and 
expressions, I may remark, that the spirit of that whole 
pamphlet is found running through Junius's Letters. 



200 LETTERS ON THE 

There is one other passage, however, in a letter of 
Junius (under his signature of Atticus), dated as early 
as October 10, 1763, and which, though not immedi- 
ately connected with this point, contains so much mat- 
ter for reflection, that you will excuse me for transcrib- 
ing it ; it is strictly prophetic, and is an illustration of 
the keen penetration, bold conceptions, and discrimi- 
nating mind of Junius. 

After describing the different characters in the minis- 
try at that time, he proceeds ; ' Such is the council by 
which the best of Sovereigns is advised, and the great- 
est nation upon earth governed. Separately, the fig- 
ures are only offensive ; in a group, they are formidable. 
Commerce languishes, manufactures are oppressed ; and 
public credit already feels her approaching dissolution ; 
yet, under the direction of this council, ive are to prepare 
for a dreadful contest with the Colonies, and a war with 
the tvholc House of Bourbon. I am not surprised that 
the generality of men should endeavor to shut their eyes 
to this melancholy prospect. Yet I am filled with grief 
and indignation, when I l)ehold a wise and gallant peo- 
ple lost in stupidity, which does not feel, because it 
will not look forumrd. The voice of one man will 
hardly be heard, when the voice of truth and reason is 
neglected ; but as far as mine extends, the authors of 
our ruin shall he marked out to the public. I will not 
tamely submit to be sacrificed, nor shall this country 
perish imthout warning.' * I am, &^c. 

* Junius's Miscellaneous Letters, No. 48. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 201 

LETTER XXVII. 

Sir, 

I have frequently alluded to the respectful and 
friendly terms in which Lord Temple, throughout the 
Letters of Junius, has spoken of his brother Mr George 
Grenville ; and, in regard to his political character, he 
has not unfrequently ' travelled out of the record,' (as 
he asserted of Lord Mansfield), either to compliment 
his statesman-like sagacity, or to screen him from any 
odium, which he apprehended would attach to him in 
consequence of his unpopular measures. This great 
tenderness towards his brother, who was acting with a 
ministry in opposition to himself, when compared with 
the invectives against Lord Chatham, his brother-in- 
law, is apparent to every observing reader. I refer to 
it again, for the purpose of adding one other remark — 
that I think it arose not so much from any inconsistency 
of the one more than the other; but that Lord 
Temple's ambition and feelings were vastly more inter- 
ested in protecting and building up the character of his 
brother George, than of his brother-in-law, for this rea- 
son, perhaps, among others, that the vast estates and 
great honors of the Earl Temple were to be inherited 
by the son of Mr George Grenville, himself being with- 
out issue. After the reconciliation with Lord Chatham, 
it is true Junius did not fail to bind the brows of that 
great man, also, with never-fading laurels. 

I give another instance or two of what I remarked 
in relation to Mr Grenville ; from the Miscellaneous 
Letters, No. 86 : 

' Who is Lord North ? — The son of a poor unknown 
Earl — who four years ago was a needy commissioner 



202 LETTERS ON THE 

of the Treasury for the benefit of a subsistence, and 
who would have accepted a commission of hackney 
coaches upon the same terms. The politics of Carlton- 
House — finances picked up in Mr Grenville's anti- 
chamber,' &LC. 

In 1765, the Falkland Islands were taken possession 
of by Capt. Byron, and had been quietly suffered by 
Spain to remain in the hands of his Britannic Majesty, 
who had erected a fort on the coast, called Fort Eg- 
mont, in 1769. Without any complaint, the Spanish 
landed a force and took the fort, and sent the troops 
back to England in two English frigates, which chanced 
to be in the harbor. For this treatment, England 
never obtained complete satisfaction. Junius's Miscel- 
laneous Letter, No. 87, is on this subject, and appears 
to be written with much sincerity and feeling for the 
rights and honor of the British Nation ; and he signs his 
letter — 'A Member of one House of Parliament, in 
Mourning for the Honor of his King and Country !' 

This long signature indicates the writer to be a mem- 
ber of Parliament ; which is an answer to those writers, 
who assert, that Junius was not a member of either 
House. 

From Miscellaneous Letter No. 31 — ' Your corres- 
pondent confesses, that Mr Grenville is still respectable ; 
yet he warns the friends of that gentleman not to pro- 
voke him, lest he should tell them what they may not 
like to hear. He means as little when he threatens, as 
when he condescends to applaud. Let us meet upon 
the fair ground of truth, and if he finds one vulnerable 
part in Mr Grenville's character, let him fix his pois- 
oned arrow there.' I am, &c. 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 203 



LETTER XXVIII. 

Sir, 

Before I conclude these letters, I must notice a 
few other circumstances, which have been introduced 
into the Junius controversy, though some of them are 
of little weight, compared with the evidence resulting 
from the leading facts already considered at large. But 
the minor circumstances, to which I allude, having been 
brought into the discussion, cannot be entirely over- 
looked. 

You have observed, that I pay little attention to some 
parts of this evidence, such as the comparison of Juni- 
us's hand-writing, his being supposed to be a tall gen- 
tleman, with bag and sword, &c. As to the first, I 
know of no other fact than has been before mentioned 
(see above, p. 141, note); and as to Junius's person, 
we have no information upon which the least reliance 
is to be placed ; it is all conjecture upon conjecture. 

In Junius's Letter to Woodfall, of December, 1770, 
he says — ' When the book is finished, let me have a 
set, bound in vellum, gilt, and lettered Junius, 1. 2., 
as handsomely as you can — the edges gilt. Let the 
sheets be well dried before binding. I must also have 
two sets in blue paper covers. This is all the fee I 
shall ever desire of you.' * 

As others have given their opinions upon the place 
of deposit of these volumes, ' bound in vellum and gilt,' 
I may also be allowed to say, that I have no doubt 
they are in the Library of the Duke of Buckingham, 

* Junius's Letter to Woodfall, No. 47, 



204 LETTERS ON THE 

deposited in the family Library at Stowe, by Lord 
Temple ; perhaps with the intention, if not instructions, 
to be forthcoming at a future day, as evidence to the 
world, of the name of their noble author. 

A circumstance equally worthy of notice, and of a 
more definite and certain character, is the following. 
I have remarked to you, that Junius has not named 
Lord Temple throughout his Letters. 

I would notice another singularity of this kind. Mr 
Almon, who published the Anecdotes of Lord Chatham 
in three volumes, says in a letter on sending a copy of 
the work to the Dowager Countess of Chatham — 
' From your Ladyship's noble brother, the late Earl 
Temple, I received the most interesting of these Anec- 
dotes ; his Lordship honored me with his friendship 
many years.' As Junius, in his letters, does not name 
Lord Temple, so. Lord Temple, or Almon, in these 
three volumes, to which he contributed so largely, does 
not name Junius ! It is true, indeed, that, in the 
Appendix, on the very last leaves of the third volume, 
among the numerous eulogies on the character of Lord 
Chatham, after his death, we find the highly wrought 
panegyric of Junius on Lord Chatham, which I have 
already inserted (see above, p. 187) ; and this remarka- 
ble and celebrated eulogy, is inserted by Almon (or 
shall I say, by Lord Temple himself?), with no other 
remark than this simple title — ' A Few Lines hy 
Junius — first published on the I5th of August, 177L' 
I am, &c. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 205 



LETTER XXIX. 

Sir, 

In a late letter (page 168), in which I spoke of 
the age of Lord Temple at the period of Junius's Let- 
ter to Woodfall, of the 27th Nov. 1771, I had not as- 
certained it with exactness, though sufficiently so for 
the purpose of this inquiry. My friend, Mr C*****, to 
whom I have been indebted for several favors of this 
kind, has since handed me a memorandum from Sal- 
mon's Peerage^ by which, I find, that Lord Temple was 
born on the 20th of September, 1711 ; this would make 
him sixty years of age at the time of Junius's Letter, 
above-mentioned ; or, in his fiftyeighth year when the 
regular series o{ Junius began, January 21, 1769. He 
might, therefore, with propriety, speak of ' his long ex- 
perience of the world.' I should not have taken the 
trouble to mention a second time a circumstance, which 
does not essentially affect the argument founded upon 
the age of Junius, but that I feel an anxious desire to 
have everything stated, if possible, with perfect correct- 
ness; having often observed, how many errors have 
found their way into the discussions of this subject, 
from the mere want of exact attention to matters of fact, 
which required only careful observation, without any 
scholarship or literary skill to settle. With this impres- 
sion I originally began the investigation ; carefully at- 
tending to the history, characters, private anecdotes, 
and public acts of the parties concerned in the transac- 
tions of the period when Junius was writing ; and en- 
18 



206 LETTERS ON THE 

deavoring to settle with precision the date and circum- 
stances of every occurrence, however minute, which 
would have any bearing on the question. And, if I 
have succeeded, as I do most firmly believe, in ascer- 
taining the author, it has been owing to this mode of 
pursuing the inquiry, unbiassed by the names and au- 
thority of any who had written upon the subject. 

My own very limited reading in works of literature, 
had not even brought under my notice all the works, 
which had appeared on this controversy. It is fortu- 
nate that I was not indebted to you for the use of Mr 
Barker's book at an earlier period ; for there I find the 
opinions of so many eminent writers, men of critical acu- 
men, of giant intellect, and many of them expressing 
opinions on the authorship of Junius, with the most posi- 
tive and undoubting confidence, that I should almost 
have been led to discard the evidence of my own senses, 
and to renounce my own settled convictions. On one oc- 
casion, when a friend put into my hands, Mr Taylor's 
book, ' Junius Identified/ though I had before come to 
the conclusion that Lord Temple was the author, and 
had made memorandums to that effect, yet, after read- 
ing it, and taking into consideration that the author was 
on the spot, the very theatre of action, and above all 
being too much influenced by his positiveness, I was in- 
duced for a time to lay aside my own opinions for future 
reflection, and await the time when the authorship of 
Sir Philip Francis should be called in question. And 
I can say with truth, that if I had read Mr Barker's 
extensive work, where are collected the opinions of a 
host of men of the highest order, such as those above 
named, before entering on the inquiry myself, I should. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 207 

by this array of talents, have been as much in despair, 
as if I had had before my eyes, Dante's celebrated in- 
scription on the entrance to another region — ' Let him 
who enters here, abandon hope.' 

But, to pursue my inquiry — I have a few more par- 
ticulars in relation to Lord Temple and his connexions ; 
and also some further remarks upon the various opin- 
ions respecting Junius. 

I request your attention once more to the Anecdotes 
of Lord Chatham, published by Almon, who, as we 
have seen, was familiarly called, ' Lord Temple's man.' 
Considering the materials of that work, at least, ' the 
most interesting ' part of them, to have been furnished 
by Lord Temple, as Almon himself declares, it becomes 
one of the important means of pursuing our investiga- 
tion ; particularly, as there are several portions of it, 
which, to my mind^ bear strong marks of the hand 
of Lord Temple, or Junius himself 

In the preface, the author observes — that ' the 
Anecdotes, which he has here committed to paper, 
were, all of them, in their day, very well known. 
They were the subject of public conversation. But 
they have not been published. His situation gave him 
a knowledge of them, and a personal acquaintance with 
several of the events. It was his custom to keep a 
diary ; in which he minuted all such circumstances as 
seemed to him most worthy of remembrance. He has 
endeavored to state the facts, as nearly as possible^ in 
the original language ; and with the original coloring 
in which they were spontaneously given at the moment.' 
He further observes, that those marked, MS. in the 
margin, are now first printed from the Editor's Notes ; 



208 LETTERS ON THE 

or from those of particular friends , who have obhgingly 
assisted him.' 

The author also states, in his letter to the Dowager 
Countess of Chatham, sent with a copy of the book — 
^ From your Ladyship's noble brother, the late Earl 
Temple, I received the most interesting of these Anec- 
dotes ; his Lordship honored me with his friendship 
and esteem many years. 

Now, Sir, who can look upon these anecdotes, ' the 
most interesting among them^ as having been furnished 
by Lord Temple, the brother-in-law of Lord Chatham, 
and read, for example, the account there given of the 
reconciliation between his Lordship and his brother, 
Mr Grenville — the latter unbosoming himself to his 
brother, relating all the intrigues of Lord Bute, and 
increasing Lord Temple's ardor on every subsequent 
occasion — without applying the remarks to the writer 
of Junius. I confess, to me, it is impossible. 

I add one other little circumstance from Mr Barker's 
Letters, showing, at once, the free intercourse subsist- 
ing between Lord Temple and Mr Almon, and also the 
patriotic feelings which to the last continued to animate 
the former. ' Stowe, Aug. 24, 1779. Lord Temple is 
much obliged to Mr Almon for the interesting intelli- 
gence he has sent ; is perfectly well in health, and not 
a little unhappy at the state of the country.'* 

It gives us pain to know, that in a few days after this 
letter, while he was, as he there says, ' perfectly well 
in health,' this distinguished man came to his death 
prematurely, by a severe accident, as stated in the fol- 

* Barker's Letters, p. 148. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 209 

lowing obituary notice in the London Magazine for Sep- 
tember, 1779. 

' Died at his seat at Stowe, The Right Honorable 
Richard Temple, Viscount Cobham, Earl Temple. 
His Lordship was thrown from his phaeton, and, un- 
happily, fractured his skull by the fall. In the capacity 
of Privy Councillor, he was of infinite service to his 
country during the glorious administration of his 
brother-in-law, the Earl of Chatham.' 

The more I have studied the character of Lord 
Temple, and, the more I have seen of the treatment 
which he received, I am constrained to say, that he was 
not only warranted in the course he adopted in the Let- 
ters of Junius, but that he is deserving the highest 
honors that an Englishman, who is determined to be 
free, can bestow on one, who has done so much towards 
protecting that freedom. And, as Junius himself prophe- 
sied in his Letter to the Rev. Mr Home — ' Without 
meaning an indecent comparison, I may venture to 
foretell, that the Bible and Junius will be read, when 
the commentaries of the Jesuits are forgotten.' 

I beg leave, in this place, to supply a little omission 
with regard to the family connexion of Lord Temple, 
which may be necessary to make more intelligible the 
operation of that cause, so far as relates to the feelings 
and motives of himself and his friends. In my first 
letter, I observed, that the Lord Lyttlcton there men- 
tioned was the same, whom Lord Temple recommend- 
ed to Mr Pitt to join in the ministry. It should have 
been stated further, that he was also cousin to Lord 
Temple, and they were much in public life together. 
They were both nephews of Lord Cobham ; Lord 
17* 



210 LETTERS ON THE 

Temple being a child of the eldest sister of that no- 
bleman.* 

You will excuse me, if the interest I take in the sub- 
ject of these letters leads me to add, by way of post- 
script to the present one, a short description of the seat 
of Earl Temple, at Stowe — the gardens of which 
have been so long celebrated. The whole, if I may so 
speak, corresponds in magnificence, liberality, and 
taste, with what we may well suppose to have belonged 
to the high-minded, honorable, and finished English 
gentleman, who appeared as Junius. 

STOWE, 

THE COUNTRY RESIDENCE OF EARL TEMPLE. 

' Stowe is a parish in the county of Buckingham, 
England, and is noted for a magnificent seat of the 
Marquis of Buckingham. Peter Temple, Esq. was the 
first of the family who settled at Stowe, in the year 
1554, and who erected a mansion-house on the estate ; 

* The family name of Lord Temple, as we have seen, was 
Grenmlle, there having been an ancient alliance between the 
Temples and the Grenvilles. The connexion between the 
Temples and the families of the Winthrops and Bowdoins, in 
the United States, is well known to you. 

The Temple family was very numerous 5 for Esther, who 
died 1656, aged 88, Lady of Sir Thomas Temple, Baronet, lived 
to see 700 of her descendants, as is affirmed by Dr Thomas 
Fuller, in his '■ Worthies of England ; ' who relates that he 
bought the truth thereof by a wager lost on the subject. The 
last of these, whom Lady Temple saw, was tlie daughter of Sir 
Henry Gibbs, wlio died 1737, at extreme old age. This last, 
was sister to Robert Gibbs, merchant, who emigrated to Boston, 
New England, about 1660. William Gibbs, Esq. of this town 
(Salem), is a descendant. 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 211 

but this was taken down and rebuilt by Sir Richard 
Temple, K. B., who died in 1697. His son, Lord Cob- 
ham (brother to Earl Temple's mother), enlarged the 
mansion by building a new front, and adding two wings ; 
but the late Marquis of Buckingham, and his predecessor, 
Earl Temple, made still greater alterations and improve- 
ments in this place. The whole front of regular and 
uniform architecture, now extends 916 feet, of which 
the centre is 454 feet. It consists of a centre, or body, 
with two wings, connected by apartments. A flight of 
31 steps leads to the grand saloon, an oval apartment, 
60 feet by 40, surrounded by scaliola columns, imita- 
tive of Sicilian jasper. The pannels, cornice, and 
dome, are all adorned with sculpture and other orna- 
ments, to produce a splendid effect. A state drawing- 
room, 50 feet by 32 ; a state gallery, 70 feet by 25 ; a 
library ; and several drawing-rooms, eating-rooms, &lc. 
constitute the principal floor. A library, fitted up to re- 
ceive Saxon MSS. and old literature, has recently been 
formed here from the design of John Soane, Esq. Most 
of the apartments are enriched with pictures, and fitted 
up in a splendid style. The gardens or pleasure 
grounds of Stowe, are, however, more celebrated than 
the mansion ; they consist of 400 acres, and present a 
great variety of surface, scenery, and objects. In some 
places they display bold swells, with narrow and wind- 
ing vallies ; the principal of which is filled with a broad 
and pellucid lake. In one part this forms a cascade, 
and over it is a palladian bridge. In different parts of 
these gardens are several ornamental buildings, consist- 
ing of temples, columns, arches, ^c. The beauties 
and characteristic features of this justly noted seat have 



212 LETTERS ON THE 

been extolled in the poetry of West, Pope, and Ham- 
mond ; and are fully described in an octavo volume, 
published in 1797, entitled " A Description of the House 
and Garden at Stowe," with thirtythree plates ; most of 
which were drawn and engraved in a tasteful style, by 
T. Midland.' It appears by Pinkerton's Travels, that 
splendid additions were made to this place at Stowe by 
Earl Temple. I am, &c. 



LETTER XXX. 

Sir, 

I perceive, on a review of my letters, which have 
been written without any regularity, as the daily avoca- 
tions of business permitted, that there are still some 
things requiring a few additional remarks. 

In my former Letters to you (page 8), I said, in 
speaking of the Pamphlet of 17G6, that Lord Chester- 
field had ascribed it to Lord Temple, but added that 
' he thought it above him.' This remark, coming from 
Lord Chesterfield, did not at all lower my respect for 
the talents of Lord Temple ; as most men have united 
in giving him the praise of being of a high order of in- 
tellect ; this was decidedly the opinion of those who 
knew him best, as Mr Wilkes, Mr Almon, and Lord 
Chatham, the latter of whom declared him to be one of 
the greatest characters the country had produced. But 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 213 

in consequence of your suggestions, that there must be 
some mistake in my application of Lord Chesterfield's 
remark, I have re-examined the subject. I am now 
satisfied that an error has occurred. Lord Ches- 
terfield did not make the remark in allusion to Lord 
Temple. The error arose from the London Maga- 
zine, in which I found the remark. In that work, 
the letter of Lord Chesterfield of 25th August, 1765, is 
dated August, 1766 (see London Magazine, 1774, the 
place of my authority, where I first saw it) ; and when 
I read it I was much surprised, being abundantly satis- 
fied, that such an opinion of Lord Temple, coming from 
any quarter, would be an erroneous one ; but being 
printed on the same page with a Letter of Lord Ches- 
terfield properly dated August, 1766, it was impossible 
for me not to be led into the mistake. The Letter of 
Lord Chesterfield is dated 14th Aug. 1766, to which 
Mr Almon alludes (as quoted by me above, page 
8), and where Lord Chesterfield ascribes the pamphlet 
to Lord Temple. Of this there can be no doubt, as 
Lord Chesterfield quotes from the pamphlet itself. 
And this is the same pamphlet, which, from the first, I 
ascribed to Lord Temple. Lord Chesterfield says, 14th 
August, 1766, ' The causes and consequences of Mr 
Pitt's quarrel now appear in print, in a pamphlet pub- 
lished hy Lord Temple, and a refutation of it, not by 
Mr Pitt himself, I believe, but by some friend of his, 
and under his sanction. The former betrays private 
conversation. My lord says, that in his last conference 
he thought he had as good right to nominate the new 
ministry as Mr Pitt, and consequently named Lord 
Gower, Lord Lyttleton,&c., which Mr Pitt not consent- 



214 LETTERS ON THE 

ing to, Lord Temple broke up the conference, and in 

his wrath went to Stowe It is certain that Mr 

Pitt has, by his dignity of Earl, lost the greatest part of 
his popularity^ especially in the city ; and I believe the 
opposition will be very strong, and perhaps prevail next 
session in the House of Commons, there being now 
nobody there who can have the authority that Mr Pitt 
had.' 

Remarks — Lord Temple having been sent for by the 
king, he certainly expected to participate in the nomi- 
nations to the new ministry, as Mr Pitt had declared 
that they had acted together, retired together, and 
would live and die together. If in his wrath he went 
to Stowe, Mr Pitt certainly was not long kept in sus- 
pense, in what manner that wrath would be employed ; 
for his own popularity was soon on the wane, and he 
was ever after unhappy, till he had done justice to Lord 
Temple, by making him reparation. This he did in 
1768, when his generous brother forgave him, and not 
only ever after ceased to write against him, but did am- 
ple justice to his exalted talents. 

I add a remark, by way of explanation of the letter 
of 1765, which occasioned the above oversight. The 
letter in which Lord Chesterfield ascribes a pamphlet 

to Lord T (adding that * he thinks it above him '), 

was published in the London Magazine, and mis-dated 
August, 1766 ; and this latter date being the same with 
Lord Temple's pamphlet, I supposed, without making 
a critical examination, alluded to that nobleman by the 

name of Lord T ; but when he says I think it is 

above him, he adds, ' but perhaps his brother C 

T assisted him.' I now perceive he could not 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 215 

have meant Lord Temple, but doubtless alluded to Lord 
Townsend, assisted by his brother, Charles Tovvnsend ; 
his remark therefore applies, of course, to some other 
pamphlet, published a year before Lord Temple's. 

As I have endeavored to be scrupulously particular in 
all my statements, I hope it will not be too late to cor- 
rect this oversight, more especially as we get rid of one 
opinion, which I had ascribed to Chesterfield, and the 
only one I have met with, that Lord Temple was not 
quite as competent to such a work as any man in Eng- 
land. 

I have said, also (in my first letter, page 4), that Lord 
Temple and Mr Pitt resigned their places in 1761-2. 
It appears by Almon's Anecdotes of Chatham, that this 
took place on the 5th of October, 1761.* In the same 
volume is Mr Pitt's letter ' to the town-clerk of the city 
of London,' explaining the motives of their resignation. 
This letter was written in order to repel the malignant 
calumnies which were circulated on that occasion. It 
is dated Oct. 15, 1761, which is correct. But in Wood- 
fall's Junius, vol. 2, page 157, of the American edition, 
this transaction appears to have occurred in 1765, and 
the letter of Mr Pitt, just referred to, bears date Oct. 
14, 1765. This is an error. I have also seen the same 
letter, somewhere, dated in 1766. I am, &/C. 

* Anecdotes, chap, xx, page 280, 7th edition, London, 1810. 



216 LETTERS ON THE 



LETTER XXXI. 

Sir, 

I send you the following extract from a New- 
Haven Journal, respecting the Stoicc Papers, as they 
have been called, which have been lately discovered 
in England : 

' JUNIUS — The Monthly Magazine, in an article 
warmly applauding the work recently published in 
New-York by an American, (Mr Fellows), identifying 
Junius with Home Tooke, and recommending its pub- 
lication in England, says — that Lord Grenville is said 
to hold in his possession five letters, which indisputa- 
bly prove the name of the author of Junius. He has 
provided for the publication of these documents on his 
death, and, in the mean while, the Duke of Bucking- 
ham and Lord Nugent are pledged to silence; it is 
also stated, that Lord Grenville has said the real author 
is not any of the persons loho have been suspected,^ 

This is, substantially, the same account, which, as I 
have lately learned from you, has been published in 
several English periodicals ; from which it has been 
copied by Mr Barker, from whose Letters I here tran- 
scribe it in its different versions. The earliest notice 
of this discovery, Mr Barker says, appeared in The 
Inspector, (a Magazine published monthly by Effing- 
ham Wilson), for October, 1827, No. 18, p. 585 ; and 
is as follows : 

' Aiigust 27. The murder 's out — Junius is at last 
discovered! and, strange to say, never once scented. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 217 

Months ago I mentioned, that at a party-conciliation 
dinner given by Mr Whitbread in 1805, at which Mr 
Fox, Mr Canning, Lord Grenville, and my father were 
present, Lord Grenville emphatically declared, '^ I know 
the real Junius — but the secret will not transpire in 
my life-time." In answer to a question of Mr Canning, 
his lordship replied, " He is not any of the persons sus- 
pected — his name has never been coupled in any way 
with Junius's." Sir Philip Francis^ one of the party, 
was not then mentioned. 

* I have myself been a bit of a Junius-hnniex , and 
have for some time taken a place among the foremost of 
the Franciscans. No merely circumstantial evidence 
could shake my faith in Francis's identity. It appears, 
however, that I lack His Holiness the Pope's preroga- 
tive of infallibility, and that I was mistaken in affiliating 
the Junius-Lctters to Sir Philip Francis. So at least 
my fat friend, Lord Nugent, tells me. Nugent is burst- 
ingly big with the secret, and I am burstingly big 
to get possession of it. My longing, I am sorry 
to say, is not likely to be very soon gratified. Wish 
I heard nothing about the matter, and that the 
" precious documents," as Chandos calls them, had 
reposed some time longer in peaceful dust. The sim- 
ple history of the discovery is, that some six weeks ago, 
as Lord Nugent and his Grace of Buckingham were 
private-paper hunting in the Stowe Library, ihey lit 
upon a parcel studiously concealed in a, to them, un- 
known recess. The parcel contained three Letters: 
one from Junius under his fictitious signature ; another 
to George Grenville asking for legal advice as to the 
risk of publishing the Letter to the King with the 
19 



218 LETTERS ON THE 

REAL NAME ; and a third, enclosing Junuis's Letter to 
Lord Mansfield, with the author's initials. References 
are made in the last to a Letter from George Grenville 
to the author. The Duke went off post-haste to Drop- 
more * with the parcel. Lord Grenville at once recog- 
nised it, and declared his intention of providing for the 
publicity of the documents after his death — but not till 
then. At his request, the Duke and Lord Nugent have 
pledged themselves to silence, till that event shall have 
taken place ; and thus I, and all others interested in 
the matter, are forced to stifle our curiosity as well 
as we can. Curiosity is a questionable phrase here 
— it smacks of Eve and Eve's daughters. I care 
not who wrote the Letters : but I wish to know, as 
a curious chapter in the history of the human mind, 
the motives, which impelled the great libeller in the 
first instance to write those matchless productions, at 
such an expense of time and trouble; and which urged 
him to conceal himself, when the storm had passed 
over, and when the fame of those Letters was far more 
than a counterbalance to the risk of the discovery. After 
all, I fear I shall not have a hundred years to wait for 
the gathering of the noble statesman to the last man- 
sion of his fathers.' 

In the London Times, January 1, 1828, the discovery 
was thus announced : — 

' Five Letters are deposited in the archives of the 
Grenville family at Stowe, which establish, beyond tlwj 
possibility of doubt, the real author of Junius. This 
eminent individual was politically connected with Mr 
George Grenville, the grandfather of the present Duke 

* The residence of Lord Grenville. — Ed. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 219 

of Buckingham, from whom these autograph-proofs 
have descended to the present possessor. The venerable 
statesman, nearly allied to the Duke of Buckingham, 
has requested the discovery should not be published 
during his lifetime. It is, however, confidently assert- 
ed, that in all the controversies relating to these cele- 
brated Letters, the author of them has not been named. 
(Morning Chronicle. )' 

The London Literary Gazette, of January 12, 1828, 
gives the account as follows : — 

* Junius. — In our first Review will be found certain 
allusions to the authorship of Junius' s Letters ; upon 
which, by the by, a new light has lately broken. It is 
stated that the original of the famous Letter to the 
King has been recently discovered at Stowe (the Duke 
of Buckingham's), with the signature of the loriter ; 
and it is added, that none of the theories yet maintain^ 
ed have hit the real person. Our opinion leant to Lord G. 
Sackville ; but, strong as the circumstantial evidence is 
for him, we are assured there is an allusion to him in 
one of Junius' s Letters (' that he liked to be in the 
rear '), which destroys the whole fabric, as it is undoubt- 
edly the last thing, which he would have allowed to be 
written. Burke we never believed in ; Sir P. Francis 
we have always disbelieved in ; and Dr Wilmot, though 
supported by the Princess of Cumberland, &c. &c. &c. 
has never been our Junius. It has always been thought 
evident that the writer was connected with the Gren- 
ville family, and, therefore, it is likely enough that an 
escritoire at Stowe should produce this revelation ; but 
it is said that Lord Grenville has requested it to be 



220 LETTERS ON THE 

kept sacred during his life. Lloyd, the secretary of 
the Right Hon. G. Grenville (if we recollect rightly), 
has been frequently mentioned (by Parr, Home Tooke, 
&c.) as the Junius; but we are assured that Junius's 
last Letter to Woodfall was dated only two days before 
Lloyd's death, under circumstances which make it im- 
possible that he could have been the correspondent. 
We have only further to observe, that what adds to the 
probability of the new rumor is, that Junius, in another 
Letter about the period in question, threatens to con- 
summate his work by one grand stroke — such as it 
would have been to publish his Letter to the King, sub- 
scribed by his real name.' 

Notwithstanding the strong and positive manner in 
which this discovery is announced, ' and professedly 
derived from the authority of Lord Nugent,' yet, 
says Mr Barker, 'it is by no means correct, as the 
reader will see by referring to a statement which the 
kindness of a friend will enable me to employ in the 
preface to this volume.' He adds — ' But what shows 
the propriety of receiving such statements with great 
caution is this ; that I was informed by a friend, who 
received his intelligence from a gentleman of literary 
character, then recently arrived in London from Stowe, 
that the discovery just made there, confirmed the claims 
of Charles Lloyd beyond all doubt ! ' * 

The statement thus furnished by Mr Barker's friend, 
and inserted in the Preface to his Letters, is as follows; 

*In p. 312, the Author has inserted some matter 
taken from the Inspector, relative to the recent discove- 

* Barker's Letters, p. 313. 



AUTHORSHIP OP JUNIUS. 221 

ries at Stowe ; a friend has desired him to correct the 
statement : — 

" London, March 22, 1823. Allow me to make the 
following assertions, that your readers may not be misled 
by a document, which has evidently been fabricated to 
gain the Magazine some notoriety. 1. I can assure 
you from the best authority, and I have every reason to 
believe it, that Lord Nugent and the Duke of Bucking- 
ham never lit upon a parcel concealed in an unknown 
recess. 2. That they found no Letter to George Gren- 
ville from Junius, askinsr for leajal advice as to the risk 
of publishing the Letter to the King, with the real name. 
8. That there was no Letter enclosing Junius's Letter 
to Lord Mansfield, with the author's initials. 4. That 
the Duke of Buckingham never went to Dropmore with 
any such parcel. 5. That Lord Grenville never de- 
clared his intention of providing for the publicity of such 
documents after his decease. 0. That the Duke of 
Buckingham and Lord Nugent never pledged them- 
selves to silence until Lord Grenvilie's decease. 7. That 
Lord Grenville at his advanced age is totally uninter- 
ested in the subject, and never makes it tlie theme of 
conversation, or of research. 8. That Lord Nugent 
never considered himself justified in conversing with his 
uncle on the subject, knowing that it was one, which 
afforded him no interest. 10. That the claims of 
Charles Lloyd (independently of his going abroad after 
the decease of George Grenville), are too vague to jus- 
tify even a suspicion that he was in any manner con- 
cerned in the publication of the Letters. 11. That 
most men entertain opinions of their own upon this 
mysterious subject, and it is highly probable that Lord 
19* 



222 LETTERS ON THE 

Nugent may suspect some individual, whose name has 
hitherto been withheld from the public ; but of such 
suspicion he has no positive evidence. 

"* I have now given a full reply to the paragraph in 
the Inspector, and I pledge my word that I have ad- 
vanced nothing, but what I have it in my power fully 
to substantiate. You are at liberty, therefore, to prefix 
it to your forthcoming publication. The images, illus- 
trations, and similies, so industriously collected and con- 
tained in your Appendix, show that the author was a 
man of the world, well read upon every subject — that 
he was a classic scholar, a play-reader, and an historian, 
an enemy to the priesthood, and one who had an in- 
veterate detestation of the chicanery of the law." 

' There is a reference to Lord Nugent in the Pre- 
face p. X, to The Vices, a Poem in three Cantos, hy the 
Author of the Letters of Junius ; — '' Who this writer 
was, is still a mystery. We are told that Lord Nugent 
has recently made discoveries, which are not, however, 
to be publicly developed till after the decease of a living 
statesman ; but the same expectation has been so often 
raised in vain, that, until the proofs are adduced, or we 
have the high authority of the noble Lord in an au- 
thentic form, the story must be regarded as legendary." ' 

But this is not all the evidence in relation to the 
Stowe Papers. Mr Barker gives two other extracts 
from letters of his friends ' who take much interest in 
the question of Junius.' They are as follows : — 

'London, Jan. 25, 1828. This very day a friend, 
who is very intimate with the Duke of Buckingham, in- 
formed me that a short time before the Duke went 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 223 

abroad, he wrote to him thus — ''What will you give 
me, if I tell you who was the author of Junius ? I know 
it ; but the secret must be kept some time longer." I 
understand the Duke found some family -papers, by 
which he is, no doubt, in full possession of the secret.' 

^Jan. 16, 1828. I have, however, some information 
for you relative to the Grenvilles, to which family 
Junius and Lloyd seem to have leaned in their political 
attachments and writings. I was informed some time 
ago that the Duke of Buckingham had, from certain 
documents, found in his archives, discovered who really 
was the author of the Letters of Junius. Not having 
the honor of his Grace's acquaintance, 1 wrote to a 
friend, who had been in the habit of spending a con- 
siderable portion of his time at Stowe, to let me know 
whether he had heard anything upon the subject during 
his stay there, and whether the Duke was inclined to 
make public the documents. In answer he informed 
me, that he had heard his Grace express himself to the 
effect of knowing who Junius was, and that his name 
was not among those, who had ever been suspected. My 
friend was not inclined to trespass further upon his 
Grace's communicativeness ; he was privileged to eat 
his mutton, drink his claret, and ride his horses, but, 
although a man of respectable rank, not authorised to 
question his noble host upon such matters. What his 
Grace's documents or suppositions are, I therefore know 
not, whether worth anything, or nothing.' 

Upon which statements Mr Barker makes the follow- 
ing just and discriminating comment ; — 

' From these authentic statements it is evident that, 
though the Stowe-discovery is not so important as the 



2*24 LETTERS ON THE 

writer in the Inspector represents, it is of so much im- 
portance that the Duke of Buckingham considers him- 
self to have detected the name of the writer ; and the 
reader will remark that in the statement, which com- 
ments on the article extracted from the Inspector, there 
is no attempt to deny the fact of the discovery, or even 
its real importance, but the denial goes no farther than 
to contradict the reported extent of the discovery.' 

I have called your attention to the various statements 
(which I had never seen till you furnished me with Mr 
Barker's work), because I think they are entitled to 
some weight, and strongly corroborate the supposition 
of Lord Temple's authorship. After making all neces- 
sary deductions for inaccuracies, we must infer from 
this evidence, that some papers have been discovered, 
at Stowe, the former residence of Lord Temple, and 
that they relate to Junius, But what is most important 
in the statement is this, that the present Lord Grenville, 
and the Duke of Buckingham, have made a declaration 
' to the effect of knowing who Junius was,' and that 
his name was not among those who had ever been sus- 
pected. Now, when we call to mind, that Lord Tem- 
ple has not been considered as the author of Junius by 
any of those writers, who have expressly examined the 
question ; and when we compare the circumstances 
stated respecting the Stowe Papers with the mass of 
proofs, which I have exhibited in these letters, can we 
doubt that the discovery at Stowe will result in the most 
conclusive evidence of Lord Temple's authorship ? 
For my own part, I was entirely convinced many years 
ago, as I remarked at the commencement of my letters ; 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 225 

long before the Stowe Papers, or any other evidence 
of that description, were supposed to be in existence. 

But it is time for me to close this investigation ; in 
the course of which it has been difficult to seize upon 
those points only which will throw the most light upon 
the subject. Instead of exhibiting here and there a 
single ray, the perspective presents a boundless horizon 
reflecting light from every point. If I had at first con- 
templated going so fully into this question, I should, 
perhaps, have made a different arrangement of some 
parts of these letters ; but the evidence continued to 
grow upon my hands as I proceeded. I have at the same 
time, and I believe with perfect impartiality, taken no 
small pains to search for proofs against my theory, that 
I might either yield to their force, or try to meet them ; 
but whatever others may be able to do, I can find none. 
On the contrary, Lord Temple, in eloquence, in pro- 
found knowledge, in skill, in warmth of temper, in in- 
dependent decision of mind, exactly fits the case ; 
while in his connexions, his enmities, his antipathies, 
particularly against the Scotch, his warmth for his 
friends, and devotion to his country, I might almost 
say, that he more than fits the case ; if others doubt, 
let the grounds of their doubts be pointed out. 

It has always appeared to me, that the British public, 
from the mystery with which the author of these Letters 
has been so long enveloped, had been brought to look 
upon them in some sense as oracular ; and there seems 
to have been an apprehension, that whenever the veil 
should be rent, and the mystery laid open to public 
view, we should meet with no small disappointment, 
from finding only some vulgar name. But they need 



226 LETTERS ON THE 

not anticipate such a disappointment. For, as the cur- 
tain is drawn up, the author is set forth, 

* In all the due proportions of a man ;' 

and those, to whom these Letters were directed, with 
pride may unite with their author in the behef, that — 
* When kings and ministers are forgotten, when the 
force and direction of personal satire is no longer un- 
derstood, and when measures are only felt in their re- 
motest consequences, this book will, I believe, be found 
to contain principles worthy to be transmitted to pos- 
terity.' 

I cannot close these letters. Sir, without making my 
most sincere acknowledgments to you personally, for 
the obliging attention you have given me. It is wholly 
due to your opinion and excellent spirit, that I have 
brought forward the subject at this time. I had before 
frequently mentioned it to others ; but it was to those 
who had either no confidence in my conclusions, and 
the evidence on which they rested, or else were pos- 
sessed of less inquiring minds themselves ; and if. it 
had not been for the interest you have taken in the sub- 
ject, I should probably have suffered my investigation, 
like the original secret itself, to ' perish' with its author. 
I am, Sir, with great respect. 

Your obedient servant, 

ISAAC NEWHALL. 

To the Hon. John Pickering. Boston. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 227 

LETTER XXXII. 

Salem, Jlpril 1, ISSl. 
Sir, 

When I concluded my last letter to you, I did 
not expect to have added anything further upon the 
subject of Junius. But having had the pleasure of 
looking into Dr ' Waterhouse's Junius,' which is just 
published, I am induced to trouble you with a few ad- 
ditional remarks. 

I had only the opportunity of two or three hours this 
forenoon to turn over the leaves ; but I at once per- 
ceived, that it contained nothing that would interfere 
with, or invalidate, or disprove, anything which I have 
urged in support of the claims of Lord Temple. On 
the contrary, I found some things, if any more were 
wanted, to strengthen my previous opinions. 

In page 170, Dr Waterhouse says — ' Behold then 
JUNIUS Brutus brooding over the disgraces of his 
country and his own personal wrongs,' &c. This is the 
awful period, 1769, when Dr W. thinks Lord Chatham 
was gathering up his strength for the great day of bat- 
tle ; but when we have found him, as he had been for 
nearly two years, laid up with the gout.* 

From 1766 to 1769, Dr W., I think, has wandered 
from the true path ; see his Chapter V, pp. 150 to 165, 
&-C. Here was the place for the application of the dis- 

* I notice a trifling oversight in Dr W's date of the first let- 
ter of Junius ; he states it, January 29, but the true date is Jan. 
21,1769. 



228 LETTERS ON THE 

secting knife ; here he would have detected the future 
Junius, or the incipient formations which composed the 
embryo. How will it be possible for him, ingenious 
as he is, or for any other man, upon the hypothesis of 
Lord Chatliani's authorship, to explain the two Letters 
of Poplicola and the one signed AntiScjanus, Jun., 
as well as several that follow, in the year 1767 ; all of 
which are filled with invectives against Lord Chatham? 
Dr W. has here left a great space unexplained ; and 
it is unexplainable upon his hypothesis. But the sup- 
position of Lord Temple's authorship solves every diffi- 
culty, as I flatter myself has been fully shown in the 
preceding Letters. This part of Junius's history and 
writings must be taken with the rest ; it cannot be sepa- 
rated ; and, in that case, Dr W. cannot say, as he has 
at page 189 — ' I contend, that the hypothesis suits that 
nobleman (Lord Chatham), and fits no other personage 
whatever.' Here I must beg leave respectfully to differ 
from him, as well as in what he says at page 107 
— 'The Earl of Temple was replete with Whig 
principles, had full enough ardor, independence, and 
resentful feelings, but lie ivanted the talents for such a 
display of them as Junius has made.' Want of talentsJ 
I- have no doubt that Dr W's candor will induce him, 
upon further examination of the history of Lord Temple, 
to acknowledge, that he has not done him justice in this 
particular. 

Page 75, Dr W. remarks — 'In less than a year after 
Lord Chatham withdrew from office, Junius hurst forth, 
the champion of the rights of Englishmen, &c.,' in 1769. 
But I may be allowed to ask, where was he for two years 
previous, that is, during the publication of the Miscella- 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 229 

neous Letters of Junius, attacking Lord Chatham, in 
1767-8 ? Has Dr W. examined these Letters with as 
much particularity as their importance demanded? 

Page 302. ' Chatham has gallantly thrown away the 
scabbard, and never flinched ; firom that moment I begati 
to like Iiim.' Note by Dr W. — ' The female partridge 
could not have practised a better lure' [!] 

The above is so purely imaginary, that I beg leave to 
refer you to what Junius sai/s of Chatham, so strikingly 
in contrast with the Doctor's supposition. See above. 

Page 332. * He (Grafton) then accepted the Treas- 
ury on terms which Lord Temple had disdained.' Well, 
what were the terms Lord Temple disdained ? submis- 
sion to the dictatorial conduct of Lord Chatham, in 
naming the whole of the Cabinet to be then formed. 
For a specimen of this dictatorial conduct in Lord 
Chatham, look at Dr W's book, page 131, where he 
proves him as arbitrary as Lord Temple would wish to 
make him. 

Page 97. ' Junius, but one great mind, but assisted 
by others.' See also 101 . I think he was not assisted. 

I find Dr W. has quoted in the following pages the 
same matter which I have already communicated to you, 
viz — 

Page 101. * I cannot consult the learned,' &c. — this 
shows he was alone. 

115. Earl Temple not named. 
' 115. Burke, quoted, on Junius. 

143.. Catalogue of British Conquests during the 
Pitt administration. 

149. AJPxion aud Lord Temple noticed — 'Note.' 

100. Chesterfield's remark of Pitt's falling up stairs. 
20 



230 LETTERS ON THE 

191. Chatham's reply to Grenville — ' Gentle shep- 
herd tell me where ? ' 

208. Grenville and Blackstone's altercation. 

310. Lord Eldon declared in the House of Lords, 
that Junius, if not a lawyer, must, &c.' 

310. Dr W. also states, that ' It is believed in the 
higher circles that Lord Camden and Lord Temple 
knew the author of Junius ; then refers by note to the 
quotation from Barker. 

From page 150 to 170, Dr. W., I think, loses sight 
of his object. Lord Chatham, and strays from the 
path that should conduct him to it. 

On the whole, I think Doctor Waterhouse's book, as 
far as 1 am able to judge by a perusal of two or three 
hours only, the best I have yet seen on the authorship 
of Junius. It appears to contain a great deal of inter- 
esting matter, which I expect to read with as much 
pleasure as instruction. My little volume, I am sensi- 
ble, will make a diminutive figure compared with his 
and others, in everything except the plain matters of 
fact — the proof s of the authorship. These I have en- 
deavored to communicate in a plain and simple man- 
ner ; and I feel confident, that the evidence will pro- 
duce the same conviction in other minds which it did 
in my own. 

I am. Sir, with great respect. 

Your obedient servant, 

ISAAC NEWHALL. 

To the Hon. John Pickering, Boston. 



AUTHORSHIP OF JUNIUS. 231 

J^ote — As every little incident, in any way connected with the 
name of Chatham, possesses some interest, I intended before to 
have sent you the following anecdote, though you may tell me, 
that it has not much to do with the subject of these letters. 

' Among the Anecdotes of Thomas Pitt, Esq., governor of 
Fort St George, ancestor to Lord Chatham, is an account of 
the celebrated Pitt diamond ; which he, in the time of Queen 
Anne's reign, brought from the East Indies, weighing 136 carats, 
and for which he paid £20,400 sterling ; it was purchased by 
the Regent of France for £135,000 sterling, or five hundred 
thousand dollars. It was placed in the crown of France. In 
the account of the diamonds of Louis the Sixteenth, published 
by order of the National Assembly of France, in 1792, this cele- 
brated diamond is called the Regent, and is there stated to be 
of the weight of 146 carats, and estimated to be of the value of 
twelve millions of livres, which is equal to two millions and a 
quarter of dollars.' J. N. 



APPENDIX 



20* 



AN ENQVIRY INTO THE 

CONDVCT OF A LATE 

RIGHT HONOVRABLE 

COMMONER. 



" Plain Truths Dear Pynsent, needs no Flowers 
" of Speech:' 

Pope. 



The third IMPRESSION, Corrected. 



London : Printed for J. Almon, oppo- 
site Burlington-House, in Piccadilly. 

CIOIOCCLXVI. 



AN ENQVIRY INTO THE 

CONDVCT OF A LATE 

RIGHT HONOVRABLE 

COMMONER. 



In the tide of almost every great man's life, there is 
commonly one period, which is not only more remarkable 
than the rest, but conveys with it strong characteristic 
marks of the complexion of him to whom it belongs. Thus 
the great Bacon, when he saw the only road to preferment 
was through Buckingham, attached himself to that Favor- 
ite, and undertook to second the views of the crown. We 
read of his excessive pliancy in transactions wholly below 
his rank and character ; particularly several attempts to 
corrupt and bias the judges, in causes wliich the king or 
his minister had much at heart. * Avarice,' says Mr Justice' 
Foster, (who, in his discourse on high treason, has recorded 
these instances of his baseness), 'I think was not his ruling 
passion. But whenever a false ambition, ever restless and 
craving, over-heated in the pursuit of the honors which the 
crown alone can confer, happeneth to stimulate an heart 
otherwise formed for great and noble pursuits, it hath fre- 
quently betrayed it into measures full as mean as avarice 
itself could have suggested to the wretched animals, who 
live and die under her dominion. For these passions, 
however they may seem to be at variance, have ordinarily 
produced the same effects. Both degrade the man ; both 
contract his views into the little point of self-interest, and 



238 APPENDIX. 

equally steel the heart against the rebukes of conscience, 
or the sense of true honor.' Whoever is at the pains of 
reading Bacon's life, will find, that from the moment of his 
attaching himself to Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, his 
character takes a new turn. We see no more of the firm 
friend, nor honest man ; both are sunk in the scandalous 
Instrument of a Favorite, without honor, and a court, with- 
out veracity ; and Villiers, and he, were afterwards im- 
peached by the Commons. The King, indeed, endeavored 
to save Villiers ; but Bacon was sacrificed. It is true, he 
had been made a lord, but he was sequestered from Parlia- 
ment ; and the pangs of his conscience were evidenced by 
every passage of his future life. 

Within our own times, who had a more exalted character, 
or whose popularity was higher, than Mr William Pulte- 
ney's ? He was the Great Commoner of his time ; the ter- 
ror of corruption, the support of virtue, the firm, disinter- 
ested patriot. But when he, treacherously, deserted his 
friends, meanly capitulated with the court, bargained still 
more abjectly to screen the Favorite, and accepted of a 
peerage, his popularity forsook him in an instant : the unit- 
ed public looked upon him as a traitor, and were unani- 
mous in condemning, detesting, and execrating him. His 
(quondam friends abhorred him, and his enemies despised 
him. That one transaction hath branded his name with 
eternal infamy. 

Other instances of the like nature are not wanting ; but 
these are enough to establish this great truth, that men 
who are innately bad, notwithstanding the force of a long 
habit of hypocrisy, will, one time or other, wear their natu- 
ral complexion. 

This has been remarkably verified in the conduct of a 
late Right Honorable Commoner, just called to another 
house. He has long dwelt as high in the public esteem as 
Mr Pulteney once did, has been considered to have talents 



APPENDIX. " 239 

superior to Bacon, and supposed to have more integrity 
than either. The people have adored him to a greater de- 
gree, than perhaps any other man ever experienced ; and 
upon repeated and positive assurances of his disinterested- 
ness, they have been led to repose in him the most unlim- 
ited confidence. However, there have not been wanting 
many who have suspected the veracity of those assurances ; 
and, whose penetration being guided by a true knowledge 
of some parts of his conduct, have frequently asserted, he 
would one day or other prove an Impostor. 

A sketch of some parts of his former conduct will not be 
amiss in this place, as it will remind the public, what hair- 
breadth escapes he has had of losing his popularity, and will 
in some measure be found to lead to the causes of his last 
great manceuvre ; the grand criterion by which the public 
opinion of his boasted fidelity and patriotism, will be for 
ever fixed upon the solid foundation of indisputable Truth. 

None was more forward or more violent, in declaiming 
with virulence against Sir Robert Walpole. By this he 
first became popular ; and the Dutchess of Marlborough 
left him ten thousand pounds, with the intention of preserv- 
ing him unplaced and unpensioned. Next he condemned 
the Pelhams, and their administration, to the shades of Ere- 
bus, as the most pernicious men, and most destructive meas- 
ures ever known and adopted. They knew his price, and 
he entered into a compromise with the Duke of Newcastle, 
who made him a Vice-Treasurer of Ireland, with the late 
Lord Cholmondeley. He then poured the most lavish en- 
comiums upon them, and deified Sir Robert Walpole. For 
the truth of these facts, I appeal to the great number of 
persons now alive who are well acquainted with them ; and 
to some, who have copies of a few of the most remarkable 
passages in his strange, inconsistent, and contradictory 
speeches. By this conduct his popularity was well nigh 
being ruined, but his friends and relations were indefatiga- 



240 APPENDIX. 

ble in supporting his character ; and he himself neglected 
neither pains nor opportunity of acquiring an interest at 
St James's, by paying court to a female Favorite, who at 
that time held the keys of promotion. And by an interest 
as scandalous, as his conduct was obsequious, he obtained 
the post of Paymaster. For a little time he was quiet, but 
his ever restless ambition soon broke out, and he aimed at 
the sole guidance of the State, which he seemed resolved 
to take by storm. He thundered against Hanover, the very 
name of Avhich he was for expunging out of the dictionary; 
it was called a mill-stone hung about the neck of Great- 
Britain, and styled the bane of this country, from the ex- 
pense which it cost us ; and the most solemn declarations 
were made, that not a shilling nor a man should go to Ger- 
many. The popular gale wafts him into power : and 
though not to that degree of eminence in station, which 
constitutionally gives the lead in public business, yet he 
usurped an absolute dominion over the whole court. It is 
his nature to bear no control, therefore the King was taken 
captive in his closet, and made prisoner upon his throne. 
But as it were to atone for his conduct, and to give the 
public another proof, that not theirs, but his own interest, 
was the object he had in view ; though absolute minister, 
and of course at full liberty to carry on the war upon what- 
ever system he pleased, and a neutrality secured for Hano- 
ver ; yet he entered into all the predilections of his sove- 
reign, broke the neutrality in Germany, and notwithstand- 
ing his many furious and energetic declarations against the 
continent, the very sounds of which were tingling in our 
ears, he plunged us deeper into the German war than any 
of his predecessors ; sent over more men and more money 
than any other minister ever dared ; and, at an expense of 
above eighty millions, conquered America in Gerinany. * 

* It is only curious, from observation of his natural inconsis- 
tency, to mention, that when the late Lord Anson was attacked 



APPENDIX. 241 

And to support this enormous load of expense, it was at 
nis express injunction, that the last heavy additional duty 
was laid upon beer, even in opposition to the Duke of New- 
castle and the late Mr Legge, who would otherwise have 
laid a tax upon the luxuries of life, in order to spare the 
industrious, and put the burden upon the rich and idle. As 
it falls almost exclusively upon the most useful and labori- 
ous part of the nation, it may with strict justice be styled a 
grievous and an oppressive tax, by which the price of one 
article of consumption was advanced a seventh — a tax 
cruelly wrung from the briny sweat of industry, and which 
seems to have been founded on no other principle, than 
that in order to render the people dependent, we should 
begin by making them poor. 

Ever wishing to obtain and preserve power by any sacri- 
fice or any means, and finding soon after the accession of 
his present majesty, that the Earl of Bute was in possession 

of the r ear, he was the first and principal instrument 

of that noble Lord's introduction to power ; particularly to 
the post of secretary of state and coadjutor to himself; 
which shows, as clearly as anything can, his early and close 
connexion with the Favourite. And upon what principle 
could this be done, but the hope of thereby laying the foun- 
dation of security to himself? 

When the Favourite had gained the ascendancy, and had 
formed designs incompatible with the honor of the crown 
and the interest of the kingdom ; when he had drawn the 

in the House of Commons upon the loss of Minorca, the late 
Commoner (knowing that the late Lord Hardwicke was then the 
Court Favorite), stood up to vindicate his Lordship, and said, 
' that he was convinced his Lordship had erred through want of 
intellect, and not through design.' After this extraordinary de- 
claration, he restored his Lordship to that very post, for which 
he had pronounced him unqualified through deficiency of under- 
etanding. 

21 



242 APPENDIX. 

substance and the shadow likewise of strength from the 
Great Commoner, and defeated him also in his mighty 
design upon Spain ; then, even then, notwithstanding this 
insult, and many others, such was either his lust for office, 
or his friendship for the Favorite, that he would have sacri- 
ficed his haughty overbearing spirit to a sufferance of re- 
maining in office, and submitted to a control not only con- 
tradictory of all his former principles, but infamous in the 
eyes of the public, had it not been for the spirited and truly 
patriotic resentment of his most noble friend and relation, 
Earl Temple ; who with a magnanimity, almost peculiar to 
himself, disdained to wear the chains, or put on the livery 
of such an incompetent statesman, such a contemptible be- 
ing; and first strongly urged, and at length forced the 
Commoner into resignation: which he accompanied with 
his own, in order to give an example of spirit and resistance 
to an usurpation, so exceedingly dangerous to both court 
and people. 

Notwithstanding the most virulent and unjustifiable pro- 
scription carried on against the late Commoner, and his 
friends, by the influence of the Favorite ; notwithstanding 
the introduction of men by the same power who had long 
been hateful to him ; notwithstanding a total alteration of 
measures ; and notwithstanding the most iniquitous sacrifi- 
ces made of the Honor and Faith of the Crown, and of the 
Glory and Interest of the People ; yet did he on that day, 
that important day, when the permanency of England wels 
under consideration, shrink back, and cover his boasted 
patriotism in a three hours' speech upon equilibrium. He 
was for and against the preliminaries of peace ; he liked 
and he disliked them ; and in a word, he was full of nothing 
but doubts and hopes and fears. If he really did not 
approve of them, and in his own heart he could not do oth- 
erwise, why did he not declare his sentiments boldly like a 
true patriot.' The reason is, he knew the peace to be the 



APPENDIX. ^ 243 

favorite measure of the Minion, and he was afraid of doing 
liim too much mischief on that occasion ; apprehending that 
a spirited and nervous opposition on that question, might 
lay the foundation of an irreparable breach ; might destroy 
forever his purpose, which was already formed, of obtaining 
a reconciliation with the Earl of Bute.* 

And so firmly persuaded was the Favorite of the Great 
Commoner's wishes to accomplish such an union, that he 
''soon afterwards employed Sir Harry Erskine to open a ne- 
gotiation for that purpose. There are not wanting those 
who know of Sir Harry's going from place to place, and 
from man to man, in search of a channel to convey the 
Favorite's designs, in a proper manner (as it was phrased) 
to Mr Beckford, who was Mr Pitt's great and confidential 
friend. ^ As soon as the plan was known, it was accepted ; 
and Lord Bute went in disguise in the middle of the night, 
in August 1763, to Mr Pitt's own house in Jermyn-street. 
And it is as certain, that the Great Commoner, in his subse- 
quent conferences with a Greater Personage, to whom the 
door was opened for him by the Minion, would have accept- 
edi and united with the Favorite, had he not been prevented 
by the strong efforts of his friends. 

* ' It is more than probable, he knew his channel of convey- 
ance to Mr Pitt ; and that a communication had, for some time, 
been opened between them, else what reason can be given for 
Mr Beckford's conduct, who was Lord Mayor of London at the 
time of making the peace, in not calHng a Court of Common 
Council, to prepare and present petitions to ParUament against 
the Preliminary Articles ? This behavior would have been spirit- 
ed, and worthy the metropolis of England, which so zealously 
condemned those articles, and the treaty itself. If that step had 
been taken, it is not very probable the vote of approbation would 
have been so much to the Favorite's Honor.' — History of MiTwri- 
ty, p. 215. 



244 APPENDIX. 

As a proof how much the miscarriage of this negotiation, 
and of course this intended connexion with the Favorite, 
was against the Commoner's wishes, let us only recollect 
the extraordinary language of his friends upon that occa- 
sion ; I mean of those few who were exclusively attached 
to him. * It were foolish, said one of them, if a womanish 
idea of consistency, that is, of acting always with the same 
man, should influence Mr Pitt to go wrong. The great and 
noble consistency of a patriot is steadily [fine bombast !] to 
pursue his country's good, and whether in the changes of 
time a Newcastle, a German Whore, or a Lord Bute, may 
be the instrument, it matters little to his country.' Here is 
a clear avowal of the wish to come into office Avith such a 
connexion. And I appeal to the members of the lower 
house, for what he himself has said there upon the subject 
of a connexion with the Favorite. Did he ever say that he 
had any objections to it? On the contrary, has he not re- 
peatedly declared, that he had none ? and that the Favorite 
might, if he pleased, lead him into the closet? This is 
epealiing pretty plainly, so plain that it needs no comment. 
There is one circumstance more ; a particular friend of his 
at that time, said, ' That an union between Mr Pitt and Lord 
Bute was the only thing that could give us our just weight 
and importance abroad, and restore peace and harmony at 
home.' And this friend was known to be a retailer of the 
Late Commoner's sentiments. From these particulars, and 
the manner in which the negotiation was set on foot, it ap- 
pears, beyond a doubt, that the Great Commoner wished for 
such a junction ; and that he was as ready to pay court to 
the reigning Favorite, as ever he had been to the Countess 
of Yarmouth, but was obstructed by the means of his friends. 

How did the Great Commoner behave after this ? Did he 
not join the Favorite's party in the pursuit of an unfortunate 
exile ? Did he not previously declare in the lobby to 
one of the Surry members, that that unfortunate person 



APPENDIX. - ^5 

must be supported ? But a few hours afterwards, was he 
not the first who rose up violently against him (with his 
usual dissimulation and affected piety), at the mention of a 
poem, which he had seen and read before ? Did he not 
with a bitterness of expression that could be dictated by 
nothing but his zeal of soliciting the Favorite's esteem, con- 
demn and traduce that unhappy man ? Did he not emphati- 
cally call him, ' The blasphemer of his God, and the libeller 
of his King ? ' and this before any judgment could be had, 
although the necessary process was going forward, in the 
courts below ? It was a censure and condemnation which 
the Favorite had much at heart, and the assistance of the 
Great Commoner was doubtless very acceptable ; and very 
probably, as it was intended, it was favorably reported else- 
where. 

In the course of the same season, we saw him first 
espouse, and then fly from the great cause of Public Liberty, 
which his Honorable Relation had been indefatigable in 
his attempts, and had expended immense sums, to bring to 
a determination. It- is true, he assisted in the first debate 
upon general v/arrants ; but finding that some of the party 
were in earnest in their designs of going further, and had 
prepared a motion against the seizure of papers, which was in 
fact tlie great grievance ; * and also finding, that the Favorite 

• They were afraid of attempting anything further, lest they 
should thereby ruin the probability of their supposed success : 
which was the reason of their not making a second effort, upon a 
motion they had formed against the seizure of papers, which was 
generally expected. That was a point of real importance to the 
Liberty of the subject; and a condemnation of a practice so hor- 
rid and illegal as the seizure of papers undoubtedly was, would 
have given the most sensible pleasure to every Englishman. 
But the real truth is, these patriots by halves only, when they 
were in office, were as strong prerogative men as those whom 
they now opposed ; and hoping shortly to be in office again, they 
21* 



246 



APPENDIX, 



dreaded the Minority gaining a victory, lest the party should 
be afterwards turned against him ; and that the Favorite 
had therefore supported the administration Avith all his might 
upon this occasion ; the Great Patriot scandalously ivith- 
drewfrom the cause and the Paiiy ; thereby preventing any 

did not choose to condemn a practice, which many of them held 
to be both justifiable and necessary. So that this minority were 
not such warm and sincere friends to Liberty as they pretended : 
though they were at infinite pains, and some expense, to make 
the public believe their professions, from their attempt to con- 
demn General Warrants. But not a step would they take to- 
wards either remedying or condemning the greater grievance, 
relative to papers ; not an inch further would they go although 
they were sure of carrying the question. If it be legal to seize 
papers (and such silence almost implies it), it is a matter of indif- 
ference to the unfortunate person whose house is plundered for 
them, whether the search and seizure are made under the au- 
thority of a general or a particular warrant; if a general warrant 
will not do, a particular one may soon be had ; a Secretary of 
State can never be many minutes in finding a Justice of Peace 
to issue a warrant for hiiu. The question is, Is such a practice 
legal ? The Minority would not say, Ko. Many of them are sup- 
posed to approve of it, in certain cases; as in high treason, &c., 
but they would neither tell the public what these cases were, 
nor under what restrictions the practice ought to be put. They 
hung out a specious, but deceitful, appearance of Liberty, a kind 
of a will loith a whisp, and intreated the public to follow it — 
The evasion of the Habeas Corpus, and the close imprisonment, 
were wholly indefensible, and would have afforded them most 
excellent questions. Those transactions were clearly against law, 
aaid therefore ought to have been censured. Perhaps with re- 
spect to the warrant, the right and best way of proceeding would 
have been to have moved a complaint against the Secretary him- 
self, at least it would have been the most constitutional, and 
most becoming the dignity of Parliament. But the Minority 
did not aim at doing justice to the laws of their country. The 
bent of their desires was to get into office. Minority, p. 283. 



APPENDIX. 247 

point being then gained towards that security of Public 
Liberty, which the whole kingdom so ardently wished for, 
and expected. 

A short time afterwards, when an impeachment of the 
Favorite was privately rumored among a few only ; and it 
.was said, that there was strong evidence ready to be given, 
particularly with regard to the peace ; when a certain baro- 
net, and others, who took some pains in order to come at 
this evidence, and the conditions upon which it might have 
been obtained were trifling (not pecuniary), and who thought 
it necessary, that the Great Commoner should be consulted 
upon a subject of such importance, especially too as he was 
looked upon to be the fittest person to lead, or principally 
support such a proceedure ; and when, in consequence of 
tliat idea, he was applied to by one of his own friends, and 
in some measure a distant relation, he checked the whole 
in the bud, by declaring vehemently against it. 

In tlie succeeding year (1765) the Favorite and the ad- 
ministration being at variance, the Great Commoner kept 
aloof. He wished to see them destroyed, from his personal 
animosity to some of them ; and he did not therefore inter- 
rupt the Minion in any of his favorite measures, neither on 
the question of the Regency, nor any other; but waited for 
the opportunity, or rather the necessity, which he thought 
the distress of the Public service, and the impossibility of 
carrying on the Public business, in such a scene of continual 
warfare between the court and the ministry, would indis- 
pensably produce, of calling him to the state ; not merely 
as one less hostile against the Favorite than any other per- 
son, but because there then was, and had been for some 
time, a good understanding between them. A negotiation 
was accordingly opened ; and it was apparently with a de- 
sign, and expectation, of getting certain great and favorite 
conditions complied with, that such pains were taken to 
prevail upon a Royal Personage (now no more) to become 



248 APPENDIX. 

the negotiator. But unfortunately for this scheme, they 
began with the wrong man. His Royal Highness first sent 
for Lord Temple. That noble Lord refused the conditions 
with a firmness that does honor to his integrity. He then 
knew nothing of what Mr Pitt would do. His Royal High- 
ness went to Mr Pitt ; and offered him the same conditions 
which had been refused by the noble Lord. And why the 
Great Commoner did not choose to accept of them, cannot 
be accounted for, unless it was because he thought them 
too hard, and apparently favoring so much of the Butean 
system, that he was afraid to desert his noble relation, who 
obviously stood upon such a public ground ; and besides, 
having no subterfuge to cover the deceit and treachery of 
so scandalous a connexion, as that with the Favorite, must, 
and would have been considered. 

In the succeeding negotiation (which was but a few 
weeks after), he was again saved by his noble relation, who 
a second time declared his refusal to enlist under the ban- 
ner of the Favorite. Again was the Great Commoner 
foiled ; and he was still afraid to break with his noble friend 
upon such a declaration ; but it is impossible to express the 
chagrin he felt in not being able to accomplish his project, 
which was nothing more than the very title and place he 
now enjoys ; the one to be obtained by the favor, and the 
other to be held under the tenure of the Earl of Bute. From 
both of which he was prevented, and his character preserved 
another year, by the superior virtue, firmness, and true pat- 
riotism of Earl Temple, who repeatedly declared, with an 
emphasis of zeal that shcAvs him to be the real friend of liis 
country, and acting wholly upon public-spirited principles, 
that he would never submit to a Butal and Ducal adminis- 
tration. And in return for his sincere friendship, and most 
essential service, the Commoner most vehemently enveighed 
against the noble Lord for his ohsiinacy, as he phrased it. 
And he repeatedly said to every gentleman, who visited 



APPENDIX. 249 

him in the West last year, that he knew of no reasons 
which could or ought to have prevented Lord Temple's ac- 
ceptance. A plain and convincing proof this, that he him- 
self had no objections to leagueing with the Favorite upon 
any terms, even though they were, that Lord Northumber- 
land should be Lord Chamberlain, Mr Stuart Mackenzie 
(Lord Bute's brother). Privy Seal for Scotland ; and that all 
the Favorite's friends should remain ; nor to seeing the 
whole ministerial system thus contaminated with the power, 
interest, and influence of the Favorite. And, let his own 
family (who best know) declare the rage he was in, and the 
intolerable uneasiness of mind which were visible in his 
speech and conduct for a considerable time afterwards, oc- 
casioned by his disappointment of hot going into office, 
with the intention, and settled condition, of accepting in a 
few weeks after the first arrangements had taken place, the 
very Peerage and the office of Privy Seal he hath now taken. 
And nothing could equal the vexation he suffered by his 
own timidity, in not deserting his noble friend and relation 
at that time, and for the very purpose abovementioned. 
But to open a door for his future advancement, he took the 
advantage of the weakness of the administration at the be- 
ginning of last winter, when there was a diversity of opin- 
ions amongst them concerning the American Stamp Act, 
to offer them his assistance ; taking for granted, I should 
imagine, that they in return would gratify him with what- 
ever place and title he desired, and would be glad of ob- 
taining, upon any terms, such an accession to their party ; 
and when the most difficult business had been got over, he 
wanted to change that administration, part of whom it is 
known he advised to accept. Finding, however, that he 
could not accomplish his views that way, owing to the firm- 
ness which the cabinet of that administration made to a 
principle so abominable and selfish, he turned against them 
before the end of the session. 



250 APPENDIX. 

We come now to this last Negotiation ; the grand crite- 
rion by which the disinterested, honest public will judge of 
the Great Commoner's character, assisted in some measure, 
as they doubtless will be, by the several irrefutable facts 
already related ; many of which naturally lead, and tend to 
an explanation of the causes of this Great, and to the world, 
unexpected event ; a ^Negotiation instituted by the Favor- 
ite, and carried on by the noble Lawyer lately removed 
from his own department to another high office in the state, 
and hastened, too, by embracing the first opportunity to 
scatter the seeds of discord in the cabinet, and from thence 
to pronounce the incapacity and weakness of the supposed 
Ministers. The error last year had been in consulting Lord 
Temple Jirst. This year another method was taken, Mr 
Pitt was first applied to ; and after that gentleman had had 
a conference first with the late Lord Chancellor, and then 
with his M., Lord Temple was sent for, who directly after 
his coming to town, waited on his M. at Richmond. Next 
day (July 16, 1766) his Lordship received a very affection- 
ate letter from Mr Pitt, then at North-End, Hampstead, 
desiring to see his Lordship there, as his health would not 
permit him to come to town. His Lordship went, and Mr 
Pitt acquainted him, that His M. had been graciously pleas- 
ed to send for him to form an administration ; and as he 
thought his Lordship ' indispensable,^ he desired his M. to 
send for him, and to put him at the head of the Treasury ; 
and that he himself would take the post of Privy Seal. The 
Commoner then produced a list of several persons, which 
he said he had fixed upon to go in with his Lordship ; and 
which, he added, was not to be altered. Lord Temple said, 
that he had had the honor of a conference with his M. at 
Richmond the evening before, and that he did not under- 
stand from what passed between them, that Mr Pitt was to 
be absolute Master, and to form every part of the adminis- 
tration ; if he had, he would not have given himself the 



APPENDIX. 251 

trouble of coming to Mr Pitt upon that subject, being de- 
termined to come in upon an equality with Mr Pitt, in case 
he was to occupy the most responsible place under the gov- 
ernment. And as Mr Pitt had chosen only a Side-place, 
without any responsibility annexed to it, he should insist 
upon some of his friends being in the Cabinet offices with 
him, and in whom he could confide ; which he thought Mr 
Pitt could have no objection to, as he must be sensible he 
could not come in with honor, unless he had such nomina- 
tion ; nor did he desire, but that Mr Pitt should have his 
share of the nomination of his friends. And his Lordship 
added, that he made a sacrifice of his brother, Mr George 
Grenville, who notwithstanding his being entirely out of 
place, and excluded from all connexion with the intended 
system, would nevertheless, support the measures of their 
administration ; that it was his idea to conciliate all parties, 
Avhich was the ground that had made Mr Pitt's former ad- 
ministration so respectable and glorious, and to form upon 
the solid basis of Union, an able and responsible adminis- 
tration ; to brace the relaxed sinews of government, retrieve 
the honor of the crown, and pursue the permanent interest 
of the public ; but that if Mr Pitt insisted upon a superior 
dictation, and did not choose to join in a plan designed for 
the restoration of that Union, which at no time was ever so 
necessary, he desired the conference might be broke oflT, 
and that Mr Pitt would give himself no farther trouble 
about him, for that he would not submit to the proposed 
conditions. 

Mr Pitt, however, insisted upon continuing the confer- 
ence ; and asked, who those persons were whom his Lord- 
ship intended for some of the cabinet employments ? His 
Lordship answered, that one in particular, was a noble Lord 
of approved character, and known abilities, who had last 
year refused the very office now offered to him (Lord Tem- 
ple) though pressed to it in the strongest manner, by the 



252 APPENDIX. 

Duke of Cumberland, and the Duke of Newcastle ; and who 
being their common friend, he did not doubt Mr Pitt him- 
self had in contemplation. This worthy and respectable 
person was Lord Lyttelton. At the conclusion of this sen- 
tence, Mr Pitt said, Good God, how can you compare him 
to the Duke of Grafton, Lord Shelburne, and Mr Conway ? 
Besides, said he, I have taken the privy seal, and he cannot 
have that. Lord Temple then mentioned the post of Lord 
President ; upon which Mr Pitt said, that could not be, for 
he had engaged the Presidency ; but, says he. Lord Lyttel- 
ton may have a pension. To which Lord Temple imme- 
diately answered, that would never do ; nor would he stain 
the bud of his administration with an accumulation of pen- 
sions. It is true, Mr Pitt vouchsafed to permit the noble 
Lord to nominate his own board ; but at the same time in- 
sisted, that if two persons of that board (Thomas Towns- 
hend, and George Onslow, Esq'rs), were turned out, they 
should have a compensation, i. e. Pensions. 

Mr Pitt next asked, what person his Lordship had in his 
thoughts for Secretary of State ? His Lordship answered, 
Lord Gower, a man of great abilities, and whom he knew 
to be equal to any Mr Pitt had named, and of much greater 
alliance ; and in whom he meant and hoped to unite and 
conciliate a great and powerful party, in order to widen and 
strengthen the bottom of his administration, and to vacate 
even the idea of opposition ; thereby to restore unanimity 
in parliament, nnd confine every good man's attention to the 
real objects of his country's welfare. And his Lordship 
added, that he had never imparted his design to Lord 
Gower, nor did he know whether that noble Lord would 
accept of it,^ but mentioned it now, only as a comprehensive 
measure, to attain the great end he wished, of restoring 
unanimity by a reconciliation of parties, that the business 

* Lord Temple afterwards wrote to Lord Gower, to excuse the 
mention he had mftde of his name. 



APPENDIX. 253 

of the nation might go on without interruption, and become 
the only business of parliament. Bat Mr Pitt rejected this 
proposal, evidently healing as it appeared, by saying, that 
he had determined Mr Conway should stay in his present 
office, and that he had Lord Shelburne to propose for the 
office, then held by the Duke of Richmond ; so that there 
remained no room for Lord Gower. This, Lord Temple 
said, was coming to his first proposition of being sole and 
absolute dictator, to which no consideration should ever 
induce him to submit. And therefore he insisted upon 
ending the conference ; which he did with saying, That if 
he had been first called upon by the K. he should have 
consulted Mr Pitt's honor, with regard to the arrangements 
of ministers, and have given him an equal share in the 
nomination ; and that he thought himself ill-treated by Mr 
Pitt, in his not observing the like conduct. 

Had Mr Pitt not chosen to refuse a plan of government, 
so obviously calculated and designed for the good of the 
country, and for putting an end to those unhappy divisions 
which have long obstructed the Public business, we should 
have seen an administration formed of the most able and 
upright men in the kingdom ; acting upon principles agreea- 
ble to the Public wishes ; and whose natural strength and 
alliances would have given such a stability to their power, 
as would have afforded the most sincere satisfaction to the 
Public ; who are concerned and grieved at these repeated 
changes, made apparently without any design of restoring 
peace to the kingdom, or any desire of putting the direction 
of affairs into capable hands : Changes obviously patched 
up, and consisting of nothing but a temporary succession of 
men, whose names were almost unknown till they appeared 
in the Gazette : Changes made hy the Favorite, and de- 
signed to render all sets of men contemptible, that he may 
at length, like Cardinal Mazarine, publicly resume his 
power, and tell the people he is the only capable man in 
the kingdom. 
22 



254 APPENDIX. 

A French Historian * has given us the character of that 
Favorite French minister in these words ; 

* His person was handsome, his manners polite, and his 
discourse insinuating. The Queen-mother was extremely 
charmed with him, and he became the soul of all her coun- 
cils. He was almost impenetrable in his designs, disguised 
in his proceedings, artful in his intrigues, and often attained 
his ends by such ways as would seem to carry him wide of 
his mark.' And Voltaire says, (in his Siecle De Louis 
XIV. for it was during the minority of that Prince, that this 
man flourished) ' That the Queen-mother made him master 
of France, and herself. He obtained that power over her, 
which an artful man will acquire over a woman born without 
strength sufficient to govern, yet with constancy enough to 
persist in her choice.' All the French Historians (vide 
Mezeray, Henault, &c.) agree in saying, Mazarine's gov- 
ernment in a little time became so intolerable, that he was 
detested by the whole people, who became actuated with a 
factious spirit of licentiousness ; the nobles too were dis- 
gusted, and putting themselves at the head of different 
parties, laid the foundation of that violent and dangerous 
civil war which broke out soon afterwards. During this 
conflict Mazarine was obliged to fly. The parliament 
impeached him, and set a price upon his head. But during 
his exile, he continued to govern by other hands, and the 
influence which he retained Avith the Queen-mother ; who 
so possessed the young King in his favor, that his Majesty 
looked upon him as a father. Though the tranquillity of the 
kingdom was restored by the banishment of the Cardinal, 
yet the court so managed affairs, that the opposition to him 
became so enervated, partly by its own blunders, but chiefly 
by the leaders listening to the overtures of the Court, which 
the Cardinal secretly contrived to get made to them, that the 
Queen-mother soon found she might safely order the King 

* Mem. de Turenne. 



APPENDIX. 255 

to recall him. His Majesty embraced him with the most 
tender affection ; and he publicly resumed his power. Even 
Orleans, who had affected to hate him most, and who 
thereby had gained the esteem of the people, was base 
enough to become reconciled to him. The nobility ser- 
vilely welcomed him into the city, and the parliament, to its 
eternal dishonor, abjectly solicited his protection. In the 
midst of this more than scandalous and infamous degene- 
racy, there was one man who remained firm against him. 
This was the Coadjutor of Orleans, the great Conde, as 
Voltaire calls him ; who had penetration enough to discover 
many of his secret stratagems and treacheries, and honesty 
enough to resist him. But what could one man do ? He 
was deserted by the party, who were so infamous and venal 
as to put on the livery of the Court. And even the Parlia- 
ment became so obsequious and devoted to Mazarine, that 
they condemned Conde, because he was Mazarine's enemy. 
*Thus France, bubbled and laughed at, bent her neck to the 
despotism under which she languishes to this day ; adding, 
one more proof, that the public hatred may not be the less 
followed by public enslavement to the person hated. Tov^ 
les terns se resemhlent. All times are similar.' And the 
present King of Prussia in his examination of MachiaveVs 
Prince, says, 'that Mazarine having surmounted all difficul- 
ties, deprived the Parliament of its privileges in such a 
manner, that to this day it is but a mere phantom ; which 
yet sometimes pretends to be a real body, but is soon made 
sensible of its error.' 

These reflections, and this part of the French history, 
naturally occur to the mind of any thinking man, who is at 
all acquainted with the transactions of these times. If we 
compare similar causes with similar effects, what has not 
this country to fear ? Will not every man say, it was an 
inexcusable thing to reject that plan of administration, 
which carried with it the obvious and convincing means of 
bringing Union and Strength to Government, and of render- 



256 APPENDIX. 

ing it formidable enough to combat, and destroy whatever 
schemes might in a few months, or perhaps weeks, be 
formed against it, by the inconstancy of the man who is 
ever projecting some internal mischief? 

This is the second opportunity that has been weakly or 
treacherously lost, of gaining that ascendancy over the 
fickleness of the Favorite, wliich is become absolutely 
necessary to establish a permanent administration. What 
passed in July, last year, is well known ; and many who 
were not then, are, I believe, now pretty fully convinced of 
his power. He made the administration at that time, as 
well as turned out their predecessors. He has turned thero 
out also, and now put in another set. Where are these 
fluctuations to end ? or what can they mean ? 

The nation hath long been wishing and calling for Mr. 
Pitt Mr Pitt is now come, and what hath he done ? I 
blush for my country, which weeps over his hypocrisy. He 
has effected his long meditated junction with the Favorite ; 
has deserted tlie only place in which he could serve his 
country ; and, like Enoch, he is translated never more to be 
heard of. 

He has sacrificed his noble friend and relation, and all 
the ties of affection, gratitudfi, honor, faith, and (if he is still 
susceptible of feeling) his domestic peace, to his present 
views. How different, let him recollect, has been the con- 
duct of that noble Lord, who, with a firmness rarely to be met 
with, and with an integrity that spoke the zeal of his heart, 
supported him upon many points of importance and difficulty, 
contrary to the opinions of many of bis best friends, and in 
danger of losing a very considerable part of his present 
possessions ; no consideration of which ever induced him 
to swerve one moment from those ties of friendship, and 
that great public cause in which he stood engaged ! — In Jan- 
uary last, the noble Lord could have gone into administra- 
tion, if he would have taken it upon the terms tliat Mr Pitt, 
I beg pardon, now Lord Chatham, has. 



APPENDIX. 257 

There have not been wanting other opportunities, and 
repeated solicitations, to induce the noble Lord to accept; 
but he never would upon terms dishonorable to himself, 
and unserviceable to his country. And yet these refusals 
have not been dictated by either a dislike of office, or a 
spirit of opposition to the wishes of the people, who know 
his abilities, and would rejoice to see him at the head of 
affairs ; for the business of one would be his delight, and 
the service of the other his pride : but by an integrity, that 
is now, and to latest ages will be admired, in disdaining to 
put on the livery of the Favorite, or that of his Vice-Roy^ 
the new made Peer, which is but his at second hand. 

This truth is clearly evinced, by what has been said was 
told to a Great Personage the same day that the noble Lord 
set out for the country ; which has been supposed was 
nearly to the following effect: That the Commoner's terms 
were of such a nature, it was impossible the noble Lord 
could accept of them consistently with his honor : that his 
Lordship had made a sacrifice of his Brother to the Com- 
moner's resentment, in order to accommodate with him ; but 
that gentleman insisted upon bringing in a set of men, some 
of whom where personal enemies to his Lordship, and with 
whom he had differed upon the most essential points of 
Government ; and would not permit him to name one friend 
for the Cabinet, in whom he had an entire confidence : and 
had assumed a poAver to himself, to which his Lordship 
never could submit; for if he did, the world would say, with 
great justice, that he went in like a child, to go out like a 
fool. That his wish was, to retrieve the honor of the nation 
by an administration formed upon a broad bottom, and com- 
posed of men of the best abilities, without respect to party, 
which his first and principal vieAv was to extinguish and an- 
nihilate, as much as possible, in order that the whole atten- 
tion of Parliament might be confined to the great objects of 

national concern. That he had never been a suitor to 

22* 



258 APPENDIX. 

either for himself or his friends, for any place of honor or 
emolument ; he did not even seek the present offer ; yet he 
was extremely willing to sacrifice his own peace and leisure, 
to the service of His M. and his country, provided he could 
do it with honor ; but that, he added, was in his own disposal, 
and he would make a compliment of it to no man. 

In the evening (of the same day) the noble Lord told the 
noble lawyer who had been appointed Negotiator, that the 
farce was at an end, and the masque was off. His lordship 
need not have sent for him from the country, for there was 
no real wish or intention to have him in the administration. 

As no reasons were given by the Commoner for refusing 
the healing propositions of his noble Relation, the Public will 
very naturally, and perhaps very justly, suppose, they were 
inconsistent with the bargain he had made with the Favorite ; 
might prove abortive of his new connexion ; or, which is more 
probable, destructive of the Favorite's great plan of Gov- 
ernment, which is nothing more, than to increase the spirit 
of division, and by perpetually playing ont; party against 

another (having always the 's power in his oAvn hands, 

which is a weight sufficient to throw the balance where he 
pleases) he is thus able to secure himself, and continue 
master of all. But had this plan of Union taken place, the 
system of governing by division must have been at an end ; 
and it would not have been prudent in the Favorite to ad- 
vise the dismission of such a ministry ; or to resort to his 
old tricks of making * . . . . 

* Thus far we had copied from an original edition of the 
pamphlet itself, when it was discovered that our copy was im- 
perfect, there being a deficiency from page GO to C9. What here 
follows consists of different extracts from the pamphlet, as pub- 
lished partly in the Gentleman's Magazine, and partly in the 
London Magazine, for August, 17C6, from which two works we 
have collected the passages here included in brackets. After the 
.passages in brackets, we copy again from the concluding pages 
of the pamphlet itself. 



APPENDIX. 259 

[ The Favorite has at the same time effected what he had 
long wished for, the separation of the Great Commoner 
from his noble relation. This separation has been the dar- 
ling object of his wishes ; has employed his whole thoughts ; 
and he has contrived an hundred stratagems to accomplish 
this great end. Sometimes he has endeavored to tempt one, 
and sometimes the other, with his offers, always taking 
them singly ; but the virtue and integrity of the noble Lord 
have always foiled his machinations, and, until this period, 
have likewise saved his relation. But a Title, and a Side- 
Place with a large salary, but no business or responsibility 
annexed to it, were baits which that gentleman had long 
been gaping after, and which at length have caught him ; 
baits which his ambition could not make him more eager to 
swallow, than the Thane was to offer. 'Wonder not there- 
fore that he has changed sides and opinions ; that he has 
united with him whom he pretended to hate ; since all sides, 
and all opinions, which promote his views, are equally eligi- 
ble to him.' But it will be matter of wonder indeed, if this 
new friendship lasts. It is too great a victory to the Fa- 
vorite, too great a triumph to the court, not to be followed 
with a total defeat. Pie will be turned out, as he has been 
turned in ; only to add, if possible, something more to that 
public odium and abhorrence of his name and character, 
which have so unanimously followed his apostacy and pro- 
motion ; his desertion of his friends and his country, and 
the accomplishment of his long-sought wretched alliance 
with the Favorite, who now laughs at his folly, despises his 
vaniiy, exults over his weakness, and rejoices in the public 
execration of such an Hypocrite, In a word, it is the Per- 
fection of the Favorite's Scheme ; Avhich no resistance, no 
integrity, no virtue of the noble Lord could prevent; met, 
as it was, more than half way, by the lust of power. Honors, 
and employment, the ingratitude and perfidy of 

[With whom, besides, is the late Commoner in league ? 
with those very men who he hated most and despised ; with 



260 APPENDIX. 

Gen. Conway, who two years ago he refused to see ai 
Hayes, though pressed to it in the strongest manner by 
Lord Lyttelton ; with Lord Shelhurne, upon whom he put 
a negative last year, when nominated to the very office he 
now enjoys ; with Col. Barre, who called him an heap of 
contradictions, &c. 

[If it is asked, why had he so great a Penchant for them 
now ? The answer is, because the first, in a great measure, 
laid the foundation of the surrender of the honor and author- 
ity of Great Britain, and made a tender of both at the feet 
of the colonies, the second assisted him, and the third fol- 
lows of course. 

[This little corps, contemptible in numbers, and despicable 
in abilities, is to be reinforced by the subalterns of the late 
ministry ; by those, whose excessive lust for office, whose 
ingratitude, meanness, and subserviency, would not suffer 
them to follow the resignations and dismissions of their 
patrons. 

[The moment these heard there was another recruit- 
ing sergeant in town ; they instantly deserted both the 
officers and colors under which they had first enlisted, and 
for present pay, and good quarters, repaired to the drum 
head of the enemy. — Video omnes damnatos omnesque ig- 
nominia affedos, iliac facere. Cic] 

.... all was not well. In a few days his measures appeared : 
and they are; a junction wiih the Favorite, to which he 
has sacrificed his old connexions, and best friends; and the 
acquisition of a Title, to which, as far as he was able, he 
has sacrificed the Public. 

I cannot conclude without the warmest thanks, I think I 
may say in the name of every Englishman, to the steady, 
discerning, and patriotic Members of the Common Council 
of the City of London ; who when repeated attempts were 
made to surprise them into an address, upon an appointment 
of men, and an adoption of measures, equally obnoxious 



APPENDIX. 361 

and injurious to the nation, refused, with a firmness that does 
the greatest honor to their public spirit ; and told the person 
applying, ' That the Commoner was caught in a Scotch trap^ 
and he must get out as well as he could.'' — To frustrate the 
efforts of a Dingley*, may there never be wanting the good 
sense and spirit of a Freeman.f — They disdained to set an 
example of deceit to the Public, and spurned, with a laud- 
able indignation, the scandalous attempts upon their under- 
standings and integrity, to become the instruments of im- 
position upon their fellow subjects ; to serve the base, self- 
interested purposes of a contemptible Faction, and cover 
the most abandoned and infamous apostacy. 

[The Pamphlet is signed N. C. M. S. C] 



APPENDIX NO. II. 

Lord Chesterfield's Letter, respecting Lord Temple's Pamphlet 
of 17C6. 

Blachheath, August 14, 1766. 
Mt^ Deak Friend, 

I RECEIVED yesterday your letter of the 30th past; and 
find by it, that it crossed mine upon the road, where they 
had no time to take notice of one another. 

The newspapers have informed you, before now, of the 
changes actually made ; more will probably follow, but 
what, I am sure I cannot tell you ; and I believe nobody 
can, not even those who are to make them : they Avill, I 
suppose, be occasional, as people behave themselves. The 
causes and consequences of Mr Pitt's quarrel now appear 
in print, in a pamphlet published by Lord T ; and in a 

* Mr Charles Dingley. 
+ Mr Samuel Freeman. 



262 APPENDIX. 

refutation of it, not by Mr Pitt himself, I believe, but by 
some friend of his, and under his sanction. The former is 
very scurrilous and scandalous, and betrays private conver- 
sation. My Lord says, that in his last conference, he 
thought he had as good a right to nominate the new Min- 
istry as Mr Pitt, and consequently named Lord G , 

Lord L , S^c. for Cabinet Council employments ; which 

Mr Pitt not consenting to. Lord T broke up the con- 
ference, and in his wrath went to Stowe ; where I presume 
he may remain undisturbed a great while, since Mr Pitt 
will neither be willing, nor able to send for him again. — 
The pamphlet, on the part of Mr Pitt, gives an account of 
his whole political life ; and, in that respect, is tedious to 
those who were acquainted with it before ; but, at the latter 
end, there is an article that expresses such supreme con- 
tempt of Lord T , and in so pretty a manner, that I sus- 
pect it to be Mr Pitt's own : you shall judge yourself, for I 
here transcribe the article : — ' But this I will be bold to 

say, that had he (Lord T ) not fastened himself into Mr 

Pitt's train, and acquired thereby such an interest in that 
great man, he might have crept out of life with as little 
notice as he crept in ; and gone off with no other degree of 
credit, than that of adding a, single unit to the bills of mor- 
tality.' I wish I could send you all the pamphlets and half- 
sheets that swarm here upon this occasion ; but that is 
impossible ; for every week would make a ship's cargo. It 
is certain that Mr Pitt has, by his dignity of Earl, lost the 
greatest part of his popularity, especially in the City ; and I 
believe the Opposition will be very strong, and perhaps 
prevail, next session, in the House of Commons ; there 
being now nobody there, who can have the authority, and 



APPENDIX. 263 



APPENDIX NO. III. 

Character of George Grenville. From the JVotes of WoodfalVs 
Junius. 

The warm attachment of Junius to every part of the 
conduct of this distinguished statesman, may perhaps be 
conceived to import something more than a mere political 
concurrence of sentiment, and to indicate an ardent per- 
sonal friendship. The editor has found it necessary to 
glance at such an idea on several former occasions. Yet 
for the honor of Junius, it ought to be observed, that there 
were few political characters of the day, who were more 
entitled to his panegyric. Upon which subject the reader 
will not be displeased at being presented with the follow- 
ing brief sketch of Mr Grenville's character from the pen 
of a gentleman to whom these notes have been already 
indebted, and Avho had repeated opportunities of forming a 
correct estimate of his worth. It is extracted from the 
second volume of Mr Knox's Extra Official State Papers, 
from which a letter written by Mr Grenville, on the subject 
of American politics, has been selected in note to Miscella- 
neous Letter, No. xxxi. ante, p. 87. The anecdote res- 
pecting Florida and Louisiana is infinitely creditable to his 
' shrewd inflexible judgment' as a statesman, and his con- 
duct as a minister is in many respects not unworthy the 
imitation of those who bold the same dignified situations in 
the present day. 

Mr Grenville, under a manner rather austere and for- 
bidding, covered a heart as feeling and tender as any man 
ever possessed. He liked office as well for its emoluments 
as its poAver ; but in his attention to himself he never failed 
•0 pay regard to the situations and circumstances of his 



264 APPENDIX. 

friends, though to neither would he warp the public interest 
or service in the smallest degree ; rigid in his opinions of 
public justice and integrity, and firm to inflexibility in the 
construction of his mind, he reprobated every suggestion of 
the political expediency of overlooking frauds or evasions 
in the payment or collection of the revenue, or of waste and 
extravagance in its expenditure. But although he would 
not bend any measure out of the strict line of rectitude to 
gain popularity, he was far from being indifferent to the 
good or ill opinion of the public ; and that tediousness and 
repetition which his speeches in parliament, and his trans- 
actions with men of business were charged with, were 
occasioned by the earnestness of his desire to satisfy and 
convince those he addressed of the purity of his motives 
and the propriety of his conduct ; and while there remained 
a single reason in his own mind, that he thought would 
serve those purposes, he could not be content to rest upon 
tliose he had already adduced, however convinced and sat- 
isfied his hearers appeared to be with them. 

'Inheriting bat a small patrimonial fortune, he had early 
accustomed himself to a strict appropriation of his income, 
and an exact economy in its expenditure, as the only sure 
ground on which to build a reputation for public and private 
integrity, and to support a dignified independency ; and it 
was the unvaried practice of his life in all situations, as he 
has often told me, to live upon his own private fortune, and 
save the emoluments of whatever office he possessed ; on 
which account he added ; " The being in or out makes no 
difference in my establishment or manner of life. Every 
thing goes on at home in the same way. The only differ- 
ence is, that my children's fortunes would be increased by 
my being in, beyond what they would be if I remained out, 
and that is being as little dependant upon office as any man 
who was not born to a great estate can possibly be ;" and 
he manifested that independence at a time and in a manner 



APPENDIX. 265 

but little known, and as the relation can now do no harm, 
I shall repeat the account he gave me of it. He had ac- 
cepted the seals of one of the secretaries of state in Lord 
Bute's administration, and by so doing drew upon himself 
tlie resentment and abuse of the then popular party, and of 
some of his own nearest relations ; his return, therefore, to 
them, was rendered impracticable upon any occasion, and 
he had every motive to induce him to remain with his 
present connexion.- Notwithstanding- Avhich, he very soon 
hazarded his continuance in office in support of his opinion, 
of what ought to be done for the advantage of the public, 
on the following occasion : 

' While the peace was negotiating, the expedition against 
the Havannah was carrying on, and as the chance of its 
success or failure was not very unequal, the negotiators 
agreed to leave it out in their uti possidetis, considering the 
event as perfectly neutral : so that if after tlie preliminaries 
were signed, it was found to be taken, it was to be restored 
without compensation. Before the preliminaries were 
signed, however, the account of its capture was received, 
and Mr Grenville immediately proposed that it should now 
be included in the uti possidetis, and compensation for it 
insisted upon, for as the event was decided before the pre- 
liminaries were signed, either party Avas at liberty to avail 
themselves of it. Lord Bute thought the treaty was too far 
advanced to make any advantage of the event being in our 
favor, and he feared that our making any fresh demand, 
would not only protract but break off the negotiation, and 
prevent the peace taking place immediately, which he 
thought so necessary for the nation. Mr Grenville was 
clear in his opinion of our right to make the demand, and 
firm in insisting that it should be made, and proposed two 
alternatives for consideration. The one, that if we judged 
it best to get the entire possession of the continent of 
North America, France having already agreed to cede all 
23 



266 APPENDIX. 

Canada, that we should insist upon Florida and Louisiana : 
the other, that if we thought it necessary to increase our 
possessions in the West Indies, beyond the three neutral 
islands, which France had also agreed to give us, we should 
ask Porto Rico, and the property of what we held upon the 
Spanish main ; and he left the Earl with declaring that he 
would resign the seals, if one of those alternatives was not 
adopted and insisted upon. After consulting with Mr Fox 
and Lord Egremont, Lord Bute agreed to make the demand 
of Florida and Louisiana, and instructions to that purpose 
were immediately despatched to the Duke of Bedford, who 
made so able and strenuous an application in consequence 
of them, that the Duke de Choiseul not only consented to 
cede Louisiana, but obliged the Spanish minister to cede 
Florida also, without sending to his court for fresh orders, 
and the preliminaries were not delayed more than a fort- 
night by the demand and acquisition of that immense ter- 
ritory.' 

Mr Grenville, shortly previous to his death, introduced 
the act for determining controverted elections, from a 
thorough conviction, as he declared to Mr Knox, ' that the 
ruin of public liberty must ensue, unless some check was 
given to the abominable prostitution of the House of Com- 
mons in elections, by voting in whoever has the support of 
the minister.' The good effects of this excellent act is on 
all sides the theme of praise so often as a controversy 
occasions the necessity for an appeal to its decision, the 
impartiality of which has hitherto never been disputed. 



APPENDIX. 367 



APPENDIX NO. IV. 

The North Briton, No. 45. 

The King's Speech has always been considered by the 
legislature, and by the public at large, as the speech of the 
Minister. 

This week has given the public the most abandoned in- 
stance of ministerial effrontery ever attempted to be impos- 
ed on mankind. I am in doubt, whether the imposition is 
greater on the Sovereign, or on the nation. Every friend 
of his country must lament that a Prince of so many great 
and amiable qualities, whom England truly reveres, can be 
brought to give the sanction of his sacred name to the most 
odious measures, and to the most unjustifiable, public decla- 
rations, from a throne ever renowned for truth, honor, and 
unsullied virtue. I am sure, all foreigners, especially the 
King of Prussia, will hold the Minister in contempt and 
abhorrence. He has made our Sovereign declare, My ex- 
pedations have been fully answered by the happy effects which 
the several allies of my crown have derived from this salutary 
measure of the definitive treaty. The powers at war 
with my good brother^ the King of Prussia, have been 
induced to agree to such terms of accommodation as that great 
Prince has approved ; and the success ivhich has attended my 
negotiation has necessarily and immediately diffused the bles- 
sings of peace through every part of Europe, The infamous 
fallacy of this whole sentence is apparent to all mankind : 
For it is known, that the King of Prussia did not barely 
approve, but absolutely dictated, as conqueror, every article 
of the terms of peace. No advantage of any kind has ac- 
crued to that magnanimous Prince from our negotiation, 
but he was basely deserted by the Scottish Prime Minister of 



268 APPENDIX. 

England. He was known by every Court in Europe to be 
scarcely on better terms of friendship here, than at Vienna ; 
and he was betrayed by us in the treaty of peace. What a 
strain of Insolence, therefore, is it in a Minister to lay claim 
to what he is concious all his efforts tended to prevent, and 
meanly to arrogate to himself a share in the fame and glory 
of one of the greatest Princes the world has ever seen ? 
The King of Prussia, however, has gloriously kept all his 
former conquests, and stipulated security for all his allies, 
even for the Elector of Hanover. I know in what light this 
great Prince is considered in Europe, and in what manner 
he has been treated here ; among other reasons, perhaps, 
from some contemptuous expressions he may have used of 
the Scot : Expressions which are every day echoed by the 
whole body of Englishmen through the southern part of 
this island. 

The preliminary articles of peace were such as have drawn 
the contempt of mankind on our wretched negotiators. All 
our most valuable conquests were agreed to be restored, 
and the East India company would have been infallibly 
ruined by a single article of this fallacious and baneful ne- 
gotiation. No hireling of the Ministry has been hardy 
enough to dispute this ; yet the Minister himself has made 
our Sovereign declare, the satisfaction which he felt at the 
approaching re-estahlishment of peace upon conditions so 
honorable to his croivn, and so henefcial to his people. As to 
the entire approbation of parliament, which he so vainly 
boasted of, the world knows how that was obtained. The 
large debt on the Civil List, already half a year in arrear, 
shews pretty clearly the transactions of the winter. It is, 
however, remarkable, that the Minister's speech dwells on 
the entire approbation given by parliament to the preliminary 
articles, which I will venture to say, he must by this time be 
ashamed of ; for he has been brought to confess the total 
■want of that knowledge and precision, by which such im- 



APPENDIX. 

mense advantages both of trade and territory, were sacri- 
ficed to our inveterate enemies. These gross blunders are, 
indeed, in some measure set right by the Definitive Treaty ; 
yet the most important articles, relative to Cessioiis, Com- 
merce, and Fishery, remain as they were, with respect to 
the French. The proud and feeble Spaniard too does not 
RENOO'CE, but only desists from all pretensions, ivhich he 
may have formed, to the right of Fishing — where ? only 
about the island of H^ewtovnbijANd — till a favorable op- 
portunity arises of insisting on it, there, as ivell as elsewhere. 
The Minister cannot forbear, even in the King^s Speech, 
insulting us with a dull repetition of the word Economy. 
I did not expect soon to have seen the word again, after it 
had been so exploded, and more than once, by a numerous 
audience, hissed off the stage of our English theatres. Let 
the public be informed of a single instance of economy, ex- 
cept indeed in the household ? Is a regiment, which was 
completed as to its complement of officers on the Tuesday, 
and broke on the Thursday, a proof of economy ? Is the 
pay of the Scottish Master Elliot to be voted by an English 
parliament under the head of economy ? Is this, among a 
thousand others, one of the convincing proofs of a frm 
resolution to form government on a plan of strict economy'? 
Is it not notorious, that in the reduction of the army, not 
the least attention has been paid to it? Many unnecessary 
expenses have been incurred, only to increase the power ot 
the crown, that is, to create more lucrative jobs for the 
creatures of the minister. The Staff indeed is broke, but 
the discerning part of mankind immediately comprehended 
the mean subterfuge, and resented the indignity put upon 
so brave an officer, as Marshal Ligonier. The step was 
taken to give the whole power of the army to the crown, 
that is, to the minister. Lord Ligonier is now no longer at the 
head of the army ; but Lord Bute in effect is ; I mean that 
every preferment given by the crown will be found still to 
23* X 



270 



APPENDIX. 



be obtained by his enormous influence, and to be bestowed 
only on the creatures of the Scottish faction. The nation 
is still in the same deplorable state, while he governs, and 
can make the tools of his power pursue the same odious 
measures. Such a retreat, as he intends, can only mean 
that personal indemnity, which, I hope, guilt will never find 
from an injured nation. The negotiations of the late inglo- 
rious Peace, and the Excise, will haunt him wherever he 
goes ; and the terrors of the just resentment which he must 
be in to meet from a brave and insulted people, and which 
must finally crush him, will be forever before his eyes. 

In vain will such a minister, or the foul dregs of his pow- 
er, the tools of corruption and despotism, preach up in the 
speech that spiiit of concoi-d, and that obedience to the laws, 
which is essential to good order. They have sent the spirit 
of discord through the land, and I will prophesy, that it will 
never be extinguished, but by the extinction of their power. 
Is the Spirit of Concord to go hand in hand with the 
Peace and Excise through this nation ? Is it to be expect- 
ed betAveen an insolent Exciseman, and a Peer, Gentleman, 
Freeholder, or Farmer, Avhose private houses are now made 
liable to be entered and searched at pleasure ? Gloucester- 
shire, Herefordshire, and in general all the Cider counties, 
are not surely the several counties Avhich are alluded to in 
the speech. The spirit of concord has not gone forth among 
them, but the spirit of liberty has, and a noble opposition has 
been given to the wicked instruments of oppression. 

A despotic minister will ahvays endeavor to dazzle his 
Prince with high-flown ideas of prerogative and honor of 
the croivn, which the minister will make a parade of frnUy 
maintaining. I wish as much as any man in the kingdom 
to see the honor of the croivn maintained in a manner truly 
becoming Royalty. I lament to see it sunk even to prosti- 
tution. What n shame Avas it to see the security of this 
country, in point of military force, complimented away, 



APPENDIX. 271 

contrary to the opinion of Royalty itself, and sacrificed to 
the prejudices and to the ignorance of a set of people, the 
most unfit, from every consideration, to be consulted on a 
matter relating to the security of the House of Hanover'? 
I wish to see the honor of the croivn religiously asserted 
with regard to our allies, and the dignity of it scrupulously 
maintained with regard to foreign Princes. Is it possible 
such an indignity can have happened, such a sacrifice of 
the croivn of England, as that a Minister should already 
have kissed his Majesty's hand on being appointed to the 
most insolent and ungrateful court in the world, without a 
previous assurance of that reciprocal nomination which the 
meanest court in Europe would insist upon, before she 
proceeded to an act otherwise so derogatory to her honor? 
But Electoral Policy has ever been obsequious to the court 
of Vienna, and forgets the insolence with which Count 
Colloredo left England. Upon a principle of dignity and 
economy, Lord Stormo7it, a Scottish Peer of the loyal house 
of Murray, kissed his Majesty's hand, I think, on Wednes- 
day in the Easter week ; but this ignominious act has not 
disgraced the nation in the London Gazette. The ministry 
are not ashamed of doing the thing in private ; they are 
only afraid of the publication. Was it a tender regard for 
the honor of the late King, or of his present Majesty, that 
invited to court Lord George Sackville, in these first days of 
peace ; to share in the general satisfaction, which all good 
courtiers received in the indignity offered to Lord Ligonier, 

and on the advancement of ? Was this to show princely 

gratitude to the eminent service of the accomplished Gene- 
ral of the house of Brunsivick, who has had so great a share 
in rescuing Europe from the yoke of France ; and whose 
nephoAv we hope soon to see made happy in the possession 
of the most amiable Princess in the World ? Or, is it meant 
to assert the honor of the croivn only against the united wishes 
of a loyal and affectionate people, founded in a happy ex- 



272 



APPENDIX. 



perience of the talents, ability, integrity, and virtue of those 
whi have had the glory of redeeming their country from 
bondage and ruin, in order to support, by every art of cor- 
ruption and intimidation, a weak, disjointed, incapable set 

of I will call them anything but Ministers — by whom 

the Favorite still meditates to rule this kingdom with a rod 
of Iron. 



APPENDIX NO. V. 

Dr Johnson's Critique on Junius. 

It was against this letter,' [Junius's 42d Letter] says Dr 
Good, ' that Dr Johnson was engaged by the ministry ^^to 
muster the whole of his political and argumentative powers. 
His answer, published in 1771, is entitled, " Thoughts on the 
late Transactions respecting Falkland's Islands ; " from 
which the following is worth transcribing : 

' To considerations such as these, it is reasonable to 
impute that anxiety of the Spaniards, from which the im- 
portance of this island is inferred by Junius, one of the few 
writers of his despicable faction whose name does not dis- 
grace the page of an opponent. The value of the thing 
disputed may be very different to him that gains and him 
that loses it. The Spaniards, by yielding Falkland's Island, 
have admitted a precedent of what they think encroachment, 
have suffered a breach to be made in the outAvorks of their 
empire, and, notwithstanding the reserve of prior right, have 
suffered a dangerous exception to the prescriptive tenure 
of their American territories. 

' An unsuccessful war would undoubtedly have had the 
effect which the enemies of the ministry so earnestly desire ; 
for who could have sustained the disgrace of folly ending 



APPENDIX. 



273 



which, after having plunged its followers in a bog, will leave 
in misfortune ? but had wanton invasion undeservedly pros- 
pered, had Falkland's Island been yielded unconditionally 
with every right prior and posterior, though the rabble might 
have shouted, and the windows have blazed, yet those who 
know the value of life, and the uncertainty of public credit, 
would have murmured, perhaps unheard, at the increase 
of our debt, and the loss of our people. 
* This thirst of blood, however the visible promoters of 
sedition may think it convenient to shrink from the accusa- 
tion, is loudly avowed by Junius, the writer to whom his 
party owes much of its pride, and some of its popularity : 
Of Junius it cannot be said, as of Ulysses, that he scatters 
ambiguous expressions among the vulgar ; for he cries 
havock without reserve, and endeavors to let slip the dogs 
of foreign and of civil war, ignorant whither they are going, 
and careless what may be their prey. Junius has sometimes 
made his satire felt, but let not injudicious admiration mis- 
take the venom of the shaft for the vigor of the bow. He 
has sometimes sported with lucky malice ; but to him that 
knows his company, it is not hard to be sarcastic in a mask. 
While he walks like Jack the Giant Killer in a coat of 
darkness, he may do much mischief with little strength. 
Novelty captivates the superficial and thoughtless ; vehe- 
mence delights the discontented and turbulent. He that 
contradicts acknowledged truth will always have an audi- 
ence ; he that vilifies established authority will always find 
abettors. 

'Junius burst into notice with a blaze of impudence which 
has rarely glared upon the world before, and drew the 
rabble after him as a monster makes a show. When he had 
once provided for his safety by impenetrable secrecy, he 
had nothing to combat but truth and justice, enemies whom 
he knows to be feeble in the dark. Being then at liberty 
to indulge himself in all the immunities of invisibility ; out 
of the reach of danger, he has been bold ; out of the reach 



274 APPENDIX. » 

of shame, he has been confident. As a rhetorician, he has 
the art of persuading when he seconded desire ; as a reas- 
oner, he has convinced those who had no doubt before ; as 
a moralist, he has taught that virtue may disgrace ; and as 
a patriot, he has gratified the mean by insults on the high. 
Finding sedition ascendant, he has been able to advance it ; 
finding the nation combustible, he has been able to inflame 
it. Let us abstract from his wit the vivacity of insolence, 
and withdraw from his efficacy the sympathetic favor of 
plebeian malignity ; I do not say that we shall leave him 
nothing ; the cause that I defend scorns the help of false- 
hood ; but if we leave him only his merit, what will be his 
praise ? 

*It is not by his liveliness of imagery, his pungency of 
■periods, or his fertility of allusion, that he detains the cits 
of London and the boors of Middlesex. Of style and sen- 
timent they take no cognizance. They admire him for 
virtues like their own, for contempt of order and violence 
of outrage, for rage of defamation and audacity of falsehood. 
The supporters of the Bill of Rights feel no niceties of 
composition, nor dexterities of sophistry ; their faculties are 
better proportioned to the bawl of Bellas or barbarity of 
Beckford ; but they are told that Junius is on their side, and 
they are therefore sure that Junius is infallible. Those who 
know not whither he would lead them, resolve to follow him ; 
and those who cannot find his meaning, hope he means re- 
bellion. 

'Junius is an unusual phenomenon, on which some have 
gazed with wonder, and some with terror, but wonder and 
terror are transitory passions. He will soon be more closely 
viewed, or more attentively examined, and what folly has 
taken for a comet that, from its flaming hair, shook pestilence 
and war, inquiry will find to be only a meteor formed by the 
vapours of putrefying democracy, and kindled into flame by 
the effervescence of interest struggling with conviction, 
us inquiring why we regarded it. 



APPENDIX. 



275 



' Yet though I cannot think the style of Junius secure 
from criticism, though his expressions are often trite, and 
his periods feeble, I should never have stationed him where 
he has placed himself, had I not rated him by his morals 
rather than his faculties. " What," says Pope, " must be the 
priest, where the monkey is a god ? " What must be the 
drudge of a party of which the heads are Wilkes and Crosby 
Sawbridge and Townshend ? 

'Junius knows his own meaning, andean therefore tell it. 
He is an enemy to the ministry, he sees them hourly grow- 
ing stronger. He knows that a war at once unjust and un- 
successful would have certainly displaced them, and is 
therefore, in his zeal for his country, angry that war was not 
unjustly made, and unsuccessfully conducted ; but there are 
others whose thoughts are less clearly expressed, and whose 
schemes perhaps are less consequentially digested, who de- 
clare that they do not wish for a rupture, yet condemn the 
ministry for not doing that from which a rupture would nat- 
urally have followed.' 

*0f this pamphlet,' continues Dr Good, 'the ministry 
were not a little proud ; and especially as they made no 
doubt that Junius would hereby be drawn into a paper con- 
test with Johnson, and that hence they would possess a 
greater facility of detecting him. Junius seems to have 
been aware of the trap laid for him, and made no direct 
reply whatever. Hoav far the Doctor was correct in asking 
the question, what must be the drudge of a party of which 
the heads are Wilkes and Crosby, Sawbridge and Towns- 
hend ? may be seen by referring to the protest entered on 
the Lord's journals against the address voted in consequence 
of the communications made to both houses of parliament 
on the conclusion of the Spanish convention, which adopts 
most of the sentiments here so ably expressed, and which 
will be found in a note to Miscellaneous Letter, No. 
Lxxxviii. Vol. HL p. 330.' 



276 APPENDIX. 



APPENDIX NO. VI. 

The arrangement of the Ministry, 1767 to 1770. 

Duke of Grafton, First Lord of the Treasury. 

Lord North, Chancellor of the Exchequer. 

Lord Camden, Lord Chancellor. 

Lord Viscount Townsend, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, 

Earl Rochford, Minister for the Foreign Department. 

Viscount Weymouth (afterwards Marquis of Bath), Minister 

for the Home Department. 
Earl of Hillsborough (since Marquis of Downshire), Ameri- 
can Minister. 
Earl Gower, Lord President of the Council. 
Earl Bristol, Lord Privy Seal. 
Sir Edward Hawke, First Lord of the Admiralty. 
Viscount Barrington, Secretary at War. 
Marquis of Granby, Master General of the Ordnance. 
Lord Howe, Treasurer of the Navy. 
Mr De Grey, and Mr Dunning (afterwards Lord Walsing- 

ham, and Lord Ashburton), Attorney and Solicitor 

General. 

ERRATA. 

Page 200, 3d line from top, for 1763, read 1768. 
" 226, 4th line " " for were directed, read were dedicated. 



THE END. 



r 27 8 2 







•v^ 



.5 -^^ 










c^ .-^<. 









*^, '♦ 



.^^' -^ 



% 



'// -^ 






cV^^ 



A^^' ^f- 






^: 



.^^^ 






V 






